Comments on: Fuel Consumption and Environmental Impact of Rickshaw Bans in Dhaka http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/ Online platform for South Asian community development (Beta) Fri, 29 Aug 2008 06:57:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=MU hourly 1 By: Jason Grant http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3910 Jason Grant Thu, 14 Aug 2008 05:52:14 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3910 No Traffic on a Saturday? Well, No Cars, Anyway Bicycles and pedestrians filled Lafayette Street at Canal Street on Saturday, the first day of the Summer Streets program. By JAVIER C. HERNANDEZ Published: August 9, 2008 At Grand Central Terminal, the trains ran as usual on Saturday. Tourists studied maps, vendors hawked water and magazines ­ but outside, something was off. On one side of the station there were no cars, taxis or delivery trucks. Instead, the street was filled with pedestrians and bicycles. Skip to next paragraph Suzanne DeChillo/The New York Times Jason Phelps, 34, stepped off the curb, tilted his sunglasses and froze. “I’ve just walked into a swarm of bicyclists,” he told someone on his cellphone. “I don’t know what they want,” he joked, “but I’m going to close my eyes and pray.” The ding of bicycle bells and the chatter of people on foot replaced the usual automobile noises along 6.9 miles of Manhattan for six hours on Saturday. It was the first day of Summer Streets, the city’s experiment in car-free recreation modeled on similar efforts in Guadalajara, Mexico; Bogotá, Colombia; Paris; and several American cities. On a path that extended from the Brooklyn Bridge north to Park Avenue and the Upper East Side, thousands of people filled the streets, taking part in activities like street-side tai chi or salsa dancing. Others simply enjoyed the chance to stroll in normally car-clogged streets. In a city where walkers, cyclists and motorists must share limited space, having a major thoroughfare through Manhattan free of cars created a giddy sort of excitement. Deborah Fried, 48, a tourist from California, rented a bicycle outside the Loews Regency Hotel on Park Avenue. Ms. Fried said she regularly rode her bicycle at the beach near her hometown of Pacific Palisades, but she had never bicycled on her visits to Manhattan . She said the Summer Streets path felt safe. “You don’t have to worry and be killed by a taxi,” she said. “To me, this beats bicycling on the beach because you get the flavor of the city.” The route was broken up by three rest stops, where water, maps and first aid were available. The stops also featured music and dance performances, and yoga and other exercise classes. Police officers directed traffic at 24 streets crossing the route. Rabbi Jonathan Feldman, 47, took advantage of the break in traffic for a walk with his children before morning services. He said he appreciated the early morning quiet on Park Avenue. “It gives the city a certain calmness that it doesn’t have otherwise,” Rabbi Feldman said. The city may make Summer Streets, which continues the next two Saturdays from 7 a.m. to 1 p.m., a regular event if it proves to be a success (city officials have said that this would be a subjective measure). Although Department of Transportation officials said they did not yet have an estimate of how many people turned out on Saturday, Janette Sadik-Khan, the transportation commissioner, praised the debut. “Summer Streets really struck a chord this morning,” she said in a statement. The plan to close off streets had drawn criticism from shop owners, who feared it would hurt business. But the city assured skeptics that Summer Streets might bring more customers to their stores. On Saturday, the economic impact remained unclear. Martha Barzola, 37, manager of a Papyrus stationery store on Park Avenue, said that the area around the store during summer weekends can sometimes resemble a ghost town. Because of the increased foot traffic, however, her store achieved its sales goal of $600 for the day within two hours, she said. But Ibrahim Hamzah, an assistant manager for an Edison ParkFast lot on the corner of Lafayette and Great Jones Streets, said he had not had a single customer, in contrast to the 30 or 40 cars that is typical for a Saturday in summer. “The number of times this is going to happen should be minimal,” Mr. Hamzah said. “We’re losing money, and it makes the job boring.” There were other complaints. One woman, who declined to give her name because she was in a rush, said she had to park several blocks away to get to a medical appointment. Other pedestrians said that some novice riders, still learning to control their bicycles, were a danger to those on foot. Delivery of food to restaurants was disrupted because trucks could not get in. Taxi drivers had also worried that Summer Streets would reduce the number of people hailing cabs. But Ali Sada, parking his cab for a few minutes at Park Avenue and 57th Street, praised the event. “All these people are going to be tired when they put their bikes away,” he said. “We’re going to make a lot more money.” Jason Grant contributed reporting. ----- ### ----- J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities mailbox@carfree. com http://www.carfree. com No Traffic on a Saturday? Well, No Cars, Anyway

Bicycles and pedestrians filled Lafayette Street at Canal Street on Saturday, the first day of the Summer Streets program.

By JAVIER C. HERNANDEZ
Published: August 9, 2008

At Grand Central Terminal, the trains ran as usual on Saturday. Tourists studied maps, vendors hawked water and magazines ­ but outside, something was off. On one side of the station there were no cars, taxis or delivery trucks. Instead, the street was filled with pedestrians and bicycles.
Skip to next paragraph
Suzanne DeChillo/The New York Times

Jason Phelps, 34, stepped off the curb, tilted his sunglasses and froze. “I’ve just walked into a swarm of bicyclists,” he told someone on his cellphone. “I don’t know what they want,” he joked, “but I’m going to close my eyes and pray.”

The ding of bicycle bells and the chatter of people on foot replaced the usual automobile noises along 6.9 miles of Manhattan for six hours on Saturday. It was the first day of Summer Streets, the city’s experiment in car-free recreation modeled on similar efforts in Guadalajara, Mexico; Bogotá, Colombia; Paris; and several American cities.

On a path that extended from the Brooklyn Bridge north to Park Avenue and the Upper East Side, thousands of people filled the streets, taking part in activities like street-side tai chi or salsa dancing. Others simply enjoyed the chance to stroll in normally car-clogged streets. In a city where walkers, cyclists and motorists must share limited space, having a major thoroughfare through Manhattan free of cars created a giddy sort of excitement.

Deborah Fried, 48, a tourist from California, rented a bicycle outside the Loews Regency Hotel on Park Avenue. Ms. Fried said she regularly rode her bicycle at the beach near her hometown of Pacific Palisades, but she had never bicycled on her visits to Manhattan .

She said the Summer Streets path felt safe.

“You don’t have to worry and be killed by a taxi,” she said. “To me, this beats bicycling on the beach because you get the flavor of the city.”

The route was broken up by three rest stops, where water, maps and first aid were available. The stops also featured music and dance performances, and yoga and other exercise classes. Police officers directed traffic at 24 streets crossing the route.

Rabbi Jonathan Feldman, 47, took advantage of the break in traffic for a walk with his children before morning services. He said he appreciated the early morning quiet on Park Avenue.

“It gives the city a certain calmness that it doesn’t have otherwise,” Rabbi Feldman said.

The city may make Summer Streets, which continues the next two Saturdays from 7 a.m. to 1 p.m., a regular event if it proves to be a success (city officials have said that this would be a subjective measure).

Although Department of Transportation officials said they did not yet have an estimate of how many people turned out on Saturday, Janette Sadik-Khan, the transportation commissioner, praised the debut. “Summer Streets really struck a chord this morning,” she said in a statement.

The plan to close off streets had drawn criticism from shop owners, who feared it would hurt business. But the city assured skeptics that Summer Streets might bring more customers to their stores.

On Saturday, the economic impact remained unclear. Martha Barzola, 37, manager of a Papyrus stationery store on Park Avenue, said that the area around the store during summer weekends can sometimes resemble a ghost town. Because of the increased foot traffic, however, her store achieved its sales goal of $600 for the day within two hours, she said.

But Ibrahim Hamzah, an assistant manager for an Edison ParkFast lot on the corner of Lafayette and Great Jones Streets, said he had not had a single customer, in contrast to the 30 or 40 cars that is typical for a Saturday in summer.

“The number of times this is going to happen should be minimal,” Mr. Hamzah said. “We’re losing money, and it makes the job boring.”

There were other complaints. One woman, who declined to give her name because she was in a rush, said she had to park several blocks away to get to a medical appointment. Other pedestrians said that some novice riders, still learning to control their bicycles, were a danger to those on foot. Delivery of food to restaurants was disrupted because trucks could not get in.

Taxi drivers had also worried that Summer Streets would reduce the number of people hailing cabs. But Ali Sada, parking his cab for a few minutes at Park Avenue and 57th Street, praised the event.

“All these people are going to be tired when they put their bikes away,” he said. “We’re going to make a lot more money.”

Jason Grant contributed reporting.

—– ### —–
J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
mailbox@carfree. com http://www.carfree. com

]]> By: Syed saiful Alam http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3903 Syed saiful Alam Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:15:02 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3903 Economic and other impact of ban on NMT pullers The HDRC study found various impacts on NMT pullers (rickshaws, vans and hand carts) when comparing their situation before and after the ban. These include: 1. Average monthly net income of rickshaw pullers decreased by 32%, from 3,834 to 2,600 taka (see Table 1 and Figure 1 below). Overall, income for NMT pullers declined by 34%. 2. The amount of money sent back to their villages also declined following the ban. Before the ban, on average rickshaw pullers spent 64% of net income and sent the rest (36%) to his village. Following the ban, the amount spent in Dhaka decreased by 27%, while the amount sent to the village decreased by 41%. Similar patterns follow for other NMT pullers (see Table 1 and Figure 2). 3. Pullers compensated for loss of income by reducing food consumption, particularly of fish, meat, and cooking oil: for NMT pullers overall, 85.9% decreased their consumption of fish, 87.5% decreased consumption of meat, 65.1% decreased consumption of cooking oil, and over half (55.3%) decreased consumption of vegetables. 4. There was an increase in the number of income earners in the family from 1.24 to 1.37. This suggests that some children have been taken out of school to compensate for lost income, or that the burden on wives of the pullers have further increased as they must earn money as well as do all the family and household labor. 5. Average number of working days per month for NMT pullers increased by 1.1 days (from 23.67 to 24.78 days a month), and for rickshaw pullers by 1.3 days (from 23.18 to 24.44 days a month). 6. Average number of working hours per day also increased, from 10.33 to 10.97 hours overall, and from 10.16 to 10.70 for rickshaw pullers. 7. More rickshaw pullers worked full-day than half-day shifts: 60.5% after the ban, and 56.7% prior to the ban; the figures overall were 65.1% after the ban and 61.5% prior to it. 8. Only about 5% of pullers reported a second income, and that second income was insufficient to compensate for the loss of income from the ban. 9. Almost all the pullers (81.6% overall) were affected by loss of income; 86.1% of van pullers reported decreased income. 10. Although HDRC recommends training in driving of MT for displaced pullers, only 1.6% of pullers overall suggest that they be provided MT driver training, while 55.9% asked for alternative rehabilitation and 31.6% suggested construction of special lanes for NMT. Similarly, while only 6% wanted an alternative profession in MT, 36% would like to take on petty trading, 27% return to agriculture, and 23% take on day labour. 4 11. Only 4% of pullers supported NMT withdrawal on other major arterial roads; fears expressed by them included hardship for the pullers and their families, and concern that the move would lead to further deterioration of the law and order situation in the country in general and Dhaka in particular. source: Improving Dhaka’s Traffic Situation: Lessons from Mirpur Road Economic and other impact of ban on NMT pullers
The HDRC study found various impacts on NMT pullers (rickshaws, vans and hand
carts) when comparing their situation before and after the ban. These include:
1. Average monthly net income of rickshaw pullers decreased by 32%, from
3,834 to 2,600 taka (see Table 1 and Figure 1 below). Overall, income for
NMT pullers declined by 34%.
2. The amount of money sent back to their villages also declined following the
ban. Before the ban, on average rickshaw pullers spent 64% of net income
and sent the rest (36%) to his village. Following the ban, the amount spent in
Dhaka decreased by 27%, while the amount sent to the village decreased by
41%. Similar patterns follow for other NMT pullers (see Table 1 and Figure
2).
3. Pullers compensated for loss of income by reducing food consumption,
particularly of fish, meat, and cooking oil: for NMT pullers overall, 85.9%
decreased their consumption of fish, 87.5% decreased consumption of meat,
65.1% decreased consumption of cooking oil, and over half (55.3%) decreased
consumption of vegetables.
4. There was an increase in the number of income earners in the family from 1.24
to 1.37. This suggests that some children have been taken out of school to
compensate for lost income, or that the burden on wives of the pullers have
further increased as they must earn money as well as do all the family and
household labor.
5. Average number of working days per month for NMT pullers increased by
1.1 days (from 23.67 to 24.78 days a month), and for rickshaw pullers by 1.3
days (from 23.18 to 24.44 days a month).
6. Average number of working hours per day also increased, from 10.33 to 10.97
hours overall, and from 10.16 to 10.70 for rickshaw pullers.
7. More rickshaw pullers worked full-day than half-day shifts: 60.5% after the
ban, and 56.7% prior to the ban; the figures overall were 65.1% after the ban
and 61.5% prior to it.
8. Only about 5% of pullers reported a second income, and that second income
was insufficient to compensate for the loss of income from the ban.
9. Almost all the pullers (81.6% overall) were affected by loss of income; 86.1%
of van pullers reported decreased income.
10. Although HDRC recommends training in driving of MT for displaced pullers,
only 1.6% of pullers overall suggest that they be provided MT driver training,
while 55.9% asked for alternative rehabilitation and 31.6% suggested
construction of special lanes for NMT. Similarly, while only 6% wanted an
alternative profession in MT, 36% would like to take on petty trading, 27%
return to agriculture, and 23% take on day labour.
4
11. Only 4% of pullers supported NMT withdrawal on other major arterial roads;
fears expressed by them included hardship for the pullers and their families,
and concern that the move would lead to further deterioration of the law and
order situation in the country in general and Dhaka in particular.

source: Improving Dhaka’s Traffic Situation:
Lessons from Mirpur Road

]]> By: Syed saiful Alam http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3902 Syed saiful Alam Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:13:05 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3902 Most people would agree that reducing poverty is an important goal, as is reducing the gap between the rich and poor. However, exactly how to achieve these goals is a matter of much debate. One often-neglected aspect is transport. Transport is a key aspect of life, affecting us not only when we travel, but throughout our days. Our peace and quiet are disturbed by car horns. Our air is polluted from vehicular emissions. Our neighborhoods are given over to moving and parked cars, leaving less room for ourselves and our children to walk, bicycle, and play. In addition to these quality of life and environment issues is that of economics. Investments made in roads take away from investments in public transport and facilities for non-motorized travel, such as by foot or bicycle. For those who can’t afford travel expenses, education and jobs may become inaccessible. For others, travel to and from work represents a heavy expense that contributes to keeping them in poverty. Reducing the travel expenses of the poor could thus help them to improve their standard of living. This paper discusses various transport options and their advantages and disadvantages, and makes suggestions for improving mobility of the majority while simultaneously decreasing poverty and increasing social equity. source: Transportation Policy for Poverty Reduction and Social Equity Most people would agree that reducing poverty is an important goal, as is reducing
the gap between the rich and poor. However, exactly how to achieve these goals is a
matter of much debate. One often-neglected aspect is transport.
Transport is a key aspect of life, affecting us not only when we travel, but
throughout our days. Our peace and quiet are disturbed by car horns. Our air is
polluted from vehicular emissions. Our neighborhoods are given over to moving
and parked cars, leaving less room for ourselves and our children to walk, bicycle,
and play.
In addition to these quality of life and environment issues is that of economics.
Investments made in roads take away from investments in public transport and
facilities for non-motorized travel, such as by foot or bicycle. For those who can’t
afford travel expenses, education and jobs may become inaccessible. For others,
travel to and from work represents a heavy expense that contributes to keeping them
in poverty. Reducing the travel expenses of the poor could thus help them to
improve their standard of living.
This paper discusses various transport options and their advantages and
disadvantages, and makes suggestions for improving mobility of the majority while
simultaneously decreasing poverty and increasing social equity.

source: Transportation Policy for Poverty Reduction and Social Equity

]]> By: Syed saiful Alam http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3901 Syed saiful Alam Tue, 12 Aug 2008 10:00:34 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3901 Suggestions for Improving Transport in Dhaka 1. Maintain the use of rickshaws by a) Canceling all planned bans on rickshaws from different roads; b) Creating rickshaw-only lanes on major streets (including those that currently ban rickshaws), and c) Considering a gradual shift to improved rickshaws that are easier to maneuver and more comfortable for passengers. If the rickshaw licensing system is to be maintained, set a higher level for the number of rickshaws, and base it on research into which all citizens can have input. 2. Cancel all plans for future flyovers, and use transportation budgets to improve public transit and conditions for NMT. 3. Make cars less affordable and available through reducing import of cars, raising registration fees and taxes, and restricting licenses. 4. Ban cars from small streets and lanes and from congested areas, and greatly reduce parking. Enforce a ban on parking on footpaths and on major streets. 5. Make cycling more safe and attractive by providing separate bicycle lanes on all major roads (creating a continuous cycle lane throughout the city) and by giving bicycles priority at traffic signals so they aren’t in danger by motorized vehicles. 6. Make cycling more affordable by greatly reducing the tariff on imported bicycles. 7. Create more places to park bicycles. 8. Increase bus use by creating special lanes for buses on major streets, banning all motorized vehicles except buses and emergency vehicles in congested areas, and considering other benefits to buses. 9. Ensure conducive environment for walking by a) creating pedestrian-only zones in the central shopping and business districts, b) reducing motorized transport (Pedestrians will naturally walk farther when the streets are quieter), c) cleaning up footpaths from construction debris and car parking (vendors actually attract Pedestrians, and should be allowed to stay, though not to block entire footpaths), and d) making footpaths more comfortable by planting more trees along them. 10. Carry out public education campaigns through the mass media and other means (e.g. through leaflets given to school children) to encourage parents to walk or cycle rather than drive their children to school, and to consider more environmentally-friendly and social means of transport, e.g. public transit and walking/cycling rather than cars/auto-rickshaws. 11. Support community programs to convert underutilized streets into children’s playgrounds for a couple hours each day, thereby making better use of roads in quieter neighborhoods, and allowing children play space, as is currently happening in various areas as a citizen initiative. Source: Improving Dhaka’s Traffic Situation: Lessons from Mirpur Road Suggestions for Improving Transport in Dhaka

1. Maintain the use of rickshaws by
a) Canceling all planned bans on rickshaws from different roads;
b) Creating rickshaw-only lanes on major streets (including those that currently ban rickshaws), and
c) Considering a gradual shift to improved rickshaws that are easier to maneuver and more comfortable for passengers. If the rickshaw licensing system is to be maintained, set a higher level for the number of rickshaws, and base it on research into which all citizens can have input.

2. Cancel all plans for future flyovers, and use transportation budgets to improve public transit and conditions for NMT.

3. Make cars less affordable and available through reducing import of cars, raising registration fees and taxes, and restricting licenses.

4. Ban cars from small streets and lanes and from congested areas, and greatly reduce parking. Enforce a ban on parking on footpaths and on major streets.

5. Make cycling more safe and attractive by providing separate bicycle lanes on all major roads (creating a continuous cycle lane throughout the city) and by giving bicycles priority at traffic signals so they aren’t in danger by motorized vehicles.

6. Make cycling more affordable by greatly reducing the tariff on imported bicycles.

7. Create more places to park bicycles.

8. Increase bus use by creating special lanes for buses on major streets, banning all motorized vehicles except buses and emergency vehicles in congested areas, and considering other benefits to buses.

9. Ensure conducive environment for walking by a) creating pedestrian-only zones in the central shopping and business districts, b) reducing motorized transport (Pedestrians will naturally walk farther when the streets are quieter), c) cleaning up footpaths from construction debris and car parking (vendors actually attract Pedestrians, and should be allowed to stay, though not to block entire footpaths), and d) making footpaths more comfortable by planting more trees along them.

10. Carry out public education campaigns through the mass media and other means (e.g. through leaflets given to school children) to encourage parents to walk or cycle rather than drive their children to school, and to consider more environmentally-friendly and social means of transport, e.g. public transit and walking/cycling rather than cars/auto-rickshaws.

11. Support community programs to convert underutilized streets into children’s playgrounds for a couple hours each day, thereby making better use of roads in quieter neighborhoods, and allowing children play space, as is currently happening in various areas as a citizen initiative.

Source: Improving Dhaka’s Traffic Situation: Lessons from Mirpur Road

]]> By: A. S. M. Mahbubun Nabi http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3900 A. S. M. Mahbubun Nabi Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:34:42 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3900 TO SOLVE THE TRANSPORTATION PROBLEM OF DHAKA METROPOLITAN AREA A. S. M. Mahbubun Nabi Professor, Dept. of Urban & Regional Planning BUET, Dhaka- 1000. In order to solve the transportation problem of Dhaka City, the Strategic Transport Plan (STP) for Dhaka City was initiated in March, 2004 by GOB with the assistance of World Bank, and with Louis Berger Inc. as Principal Consultants and Bangladesh Consultant Ltd. as local partner. In August, 2004 an Advisory Committee comprising of some 32 members from different categories of professionals, engineers, planners, architects, academics, civil servants etc. was appointed to guide and oversee the work of the consultants. The plan (STP) was completed in December, 2005. The Strategic Transport Plan (STP) has made some strategic recommendations to solve the transportation problems of Dhaka City. The major components of the Strategic Transport Plan are the following: (A) Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system, which include the following components: a) Three Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Routes of total length of about 200 Km. at a total cost of U. S. $ 1.0 billion b) Three Metro Lines with an estimated cost of about U. S. $ 2.1 billion, or Taka 14,500 crores. (B) 50 Roadway Projects including the following components : a) Three elevated expressways : Gulistan-Jatrabari Flyover; Gulistan - Mohakhali Elevated Expressway; and Moghbazar Flyover; and b) Two Bypass Roads : the Eastern Bypass and the Western Bypass. The STP recommendations are highly capital intensive option that will require a total investment of U.S. $ 5.52 billion or Taka 38,000 crores for its implementation, but the benefits which will be achieved out of this investment will not be very significant. Some of the capital-intensive projects as recommended in the STP are discussed below : Metro System : The STP team has recommended a Metro System comprised of three Metro Lines at a total cost of U.S. $ 2.1 billion or Taka 14,500 crores. The total length of the Metro Lines is not known, but I guess it will be about 70 km. in length. If we consider that people will walk down to Metro Stations from a distance of 1 km. to avail the Metro service, then the area-coverage of Metro service will only be about 140 sq. km. But, the total area of Dhaka Metropolitan City (RAJUK area) is about 1530 sq. km. Hence, the area-coverage of Metro Service will be less than 10 percent of total area of Dhaka Metropolitan City. The STP team has failed to recognize some major disadvantages of Metro system, such as, they are technically difficult and potentially unfeasible in a city prone to flooding. If the Metro system has to be safe for implementation and operation, then Dhaka City will have to be made completely flood-free for all time, which will be extremely difficult. Metro construction requires costly excavation. Typical costs of Metro is about $ 50.0 million to 240.0 million per km. Additional costs are involved with other infrastructures, such as underground Metro stations. A Metro station costs about $ 150.0 million. Operating costs of Metros are extremely high requiring very expensive electric rail cars. Metro systems require constant and huge supply of electricity which will be very difficult to be ensured in Dhaka City. Most Metro systems of the world have operating deficits which can often severe the budget of the country. Worldwide experience is that, except in a few cases the fare of the Metro ride is subsidized, and in some cases very heavily subsidized. The experience shows that the various Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) projects from the late 1990’s are all in financial trouble and are nowhere achieving profitability. In Sao Paulo Metro, the City Govt. pays a subsidy of $ 0.20 (25%) for each trip (total trips are 2.1 million per day). One of the more spectacular recent failures of a Metro and LRT was in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. In the system there were substantial subsidy in the fare . The result was a financial failure and the system was nationalized in late 2001. After only 3 years of operation the system accumulated debts of more than US. $ 1.4 billion leading to the biggest bankruptcy in Malaysian corporate history. The 20 km Metro in Singapore, built at a total cost of U.S. $ 2.9 billion, have an operational loss of US. $ 1.1 million per month in 2004. The STP recommended Metro for Dhaka city, if it is built and operated, will have a minimum economic fare of Tk. 10.0 for the ride of 1 km. distance, which will be affordable only for a very small percentage of passengers. In order to make it affordable for middle-income group of people, at least 50 percent subsidy in the fare will be required. The STP has estimated that about 57,42,000 passenger trips will be carried daily by the Metro, and the average trip-lengths will be about 5 km. Hence, a subsidy of Tk. 143.55 million will have to be paid daily and the yearly subsidy will be about Tk. 5240 crores. The construction of Metros is often agonizingly slow. The 20 km Metro in Singapore was under construction for nearly 8 years. The Blue Line Subway (21 km.) in Bangkok was under construction for about 7 years. Flexibility to expand and adaptability to a changing situation is also a key requirement for any mass transit system. Dhaka is rapidly growing and the situation in the city is rapidly changing. But the expansion of the Metro system is very complex. Per kilometer construction cost of Metro is about hundred times more than that of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system, and thus the Metro system is likely to cover only a very small portion of the city and would be of far less use if the private auto users are not diverted to the Metro service. According to the STP estimate, the Dhaka Metropolitan Study Area will generate daily 7 crore travel-trips of which only 8% of the trips will be served by Metro service. With an investment of Tk. 14,500 crores, the Metro system will not be able to solve more than 10 percent of the transportation problems of Dhaka City. Elevated Expressways and Flyovers: The STP team has recommended a system of Elevated Expressways and Flyovers of about 29 km. length. The construction cost of this system will be about U.S. $ 0.9 billion or Taka 6200 crores. Elevated expressways generate their own traffic diverted from other roads. They favour only a very small minority of people driving cars and autos, often simply shift congestion from one point to another in the network, increases in noise, pollution, congestion and fuel consumption. As the former Mayor of Bogotá, Enrique Penalosa once remarked, “There are two ways to destroy a city. One is through nuclear bombing, and the other is with elevated roads”. The STP study itself exposed the potential disastrous consequences of elevated expressways. Government subsidies provided to the use of elevated expressways only favour the richest segment of the population which is contrary to equity goals. Evidence suggests that existing flyovers have actually caused an increase in traffic congestion on the roads below the flyovers. In Dhaka city (in 2004) only one percent of the population was owners of autos and individualized transport (private car, jeep, micro, station wagon and pick-up). Flyovers and elevated expressways constructed at a great public expense, will only serve the needs of less than one percent people who own an individualized transport. For the remaining 99 percent of the people, these projects offer little benefit beyond increased difficulties and congestion, because the road capacities below the flyovers are reduced by at least 20 percent of the original capacity. Such facilities are of little benefit to buses, since buses generally move at ground level given the need for passenger to board and alight. These are inaccessible to pedestrians and cannot be used by rickshaws. They do not benefit the very large majority of people in the city and portrays a policy which cannot be sustainable. Elevated expressways can only be justified in the cities where almost all families own a car. But in case of Dhaka, where auto-ownership is only one percent, it will be a great blunder to build elevated expressways. The capital once invested on such projects becomes fixed with the land and become unable to be withdrawn any significant part of the investment through failure to command a fair return from it. The construction of elevated expressways through densely populated urban areas is likely to have serious detrimental impacts on environment and door-to-door accessibility. In Seoul, South Korea, government recently tore down an elevated expressway when they realized that it worsened the situation without solving any problem. The STP recommendations are biased and is detrimental to the economy of the country. Though the STP recommendations have been claimed to be a multimodal solution, but the study refers to only fuel-dependent transports ignoring the contributions of fuel-free non-motorized transports and pedestrians. Fuel-free non-motorized transport and pedestrian movements represent more than 50 percent of the total trips, and short trips constitute 76 percent of total trips in Dhaka City. How can the STP transport model be regarded as valid when it ignores the majority of the trips? The STP study has other weaknesses as well. In order to assess mobility of passengers in a mixed mode urban area, it is imperative to evaluate transport alternatives with respect to door-to-door trips. The trip time or trip distance represents only a portion of the travel. The total travel constitutes link travel time, walking time, waiting time and penalties of modal transfer, which have not been considered in the STP model. Hence, the recommendations of the STP model do not ensure that this will increase the convenience of mobility and access for the majority of the people. The Strategic Transport Plan (STP) for Dhaka city has opted for a transportation strategy which is highly capital intensive and which will require about US. $ 5.52 billion or Taka 38,000 crore for its implementation, but the strategy will not be successful in solving the transportation problem of Dhaka City. The reason is explained below: When the population of a city increases, the volume of traffic on the roads also increases, and as the volume of traffic on the roads increases, the transportation problem also increases,. The Strategic Transportation Plan for Dhaka City has been prepared for a population of 1,98,00,000 (within RAJUK area) in the year 2024. Beyond this period population of Dhaka City will grow at least at a growth rate of 3.0 percent per annum. Hence, the solution of transportation problem which has been given for a population of 1,98,00,000 will soon become ineffective at an increased level of population in the City. TO SOLVE THE TRANSPORTATION PROBLEM
OF DHAKA METROPOLITAN AREA
A. S. M. Mahbubun Nabi
Professor, Dept. of Urban & Regional Planning
BUET, Dhaka- 1000.

In order to solve the transportation problem of Dhaka City, the Strategic Transport Plan (STP) for Dhaka City was initiated in March, 2004 by GOB with the assistance of World Bank, and with Louis Berger Inc. as Principal Consultants and Bangladesh Consultant Ltd. as local partner. In August, 2004 an Advisory Committee comprising of some 32 members from different categories of professionals, engineers, planners, architects, academics, civil servants etc. was appointed to guide and oversee the work of the consultants. The plan (STP) was completed in December, 2005.

The Strategic Transport Plan (STP) has made some strategic recommendations to solve the transportation problems of Dhaka City. The major components of the Strategic Transport Plan are the following:
(A) Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) system, which include the following components:
a) Three Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Routes of total length of about 200 Km. at a total
cost of U. S. $ 1.0 billion
b) Three Metro Lines with an estimated cost of about U. S. $ 2.1 billion, or Taka
14,500 crores.

(B) 50 Roadway Projects including the following components :
a) Three elevated expressways : Gulistan-Jatrabari Flyover; Gulistan - Mohakhali
Elevated Expressway; and Moghbazar Flyover; and
b) Two Bypass Roads : the Eastern Bypass and the Western Bypass.

The STP recommendations are highly capital intensive option that will require a total investment of U.S. $ 5.52 billion or Taka 38,000 crores for its implementation, but the benefits which will be achieved out of this investment will not be very significant. Some of the capital-intensive projects as recommended in the STP are discussed below :

Metro System : The STP team has recommended a Metro System comprised of three Metro Lines at a total cost of U.S. $ 2.1 billion or Taka 14,500 crores. The total length of the Metro Lines is not known, but I guess it will be about 70 km. in length. If we consider that people will walk down to Metro Stations from a distance of 1 km. to avail the Metro service, then the area-coverage of Metro service will only be about 140 sq. km. But, the total area of Dhaka Metropolitan City (RAJUK area) is about 1530 sq. km. Hence, the area-coverage of Metro Service will be less than 10 percent of total area of Dhaka Metropolitan City.

The STP team has failed to recognize some major disadvantages of Metro system, such as, they are technically difficult and potentially unfeasible in a city prone to flooding. If the Metro system has to be safe for implementation and operation, then Dhaka City will have to be made completely flood-free for all time, which will be extremely difficult.

Metro construction requires costly excavation. Typical costs of Metro is about $ 50.0 million to 240.0 million per km. Additional costs are involved with other infrastructures, such as underground Metro stations. A Metro station costs about $ 150.0 million.

Operating costs of Metros are extremely high requiring very expensive electric rail cars. Metro systems require constant and huge supply of electricity which will be very difficult to be ensured in Dhaka City. Most Metro systems of the world have operating deficits which can often severe the budget of the country.

Worldwide experience is that, except in a few cases the fare of the Metro ride is subsidized, and in some cases very heavily subsidized. The experience shows that the various Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) projects from the late 1990’s are all in financial trouble and are nowhere achieving profitability.

In Sao Paulo Metro, the City Govt. pays a subsidy of $ 0.20 (25%) for each trip (total trips are 2.1 million per day). One of the more spectacular recent failures of a Metro and LRT was in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. In the system there were substantial subsidy in the fare . The result was a financial failure and the system was nationalized in late 2001. After only 3 years of operation the system accumulated debts of more than US. $ 1.4 billion leading to the biggest bankruptcy in Malaysian corporate history. The 20 km Metro in Singapore, built at a
total cost of U.S. $ 2.9 billion, have an operational loss of US. $ 1.1 million per month in 2004.

The STP recommended Metro for Dhaka city, if it is built and operated, will have a minimum economic fare of Tk. 10.0 for the ride of 1 km. distance, which will be affordable only for a very small percentage of passengers. In order to make it affordable for middle-income group of people, at least 50 percent subsidy in the fare will be required. The STP has estimated that about 57,42,000 passenger trips will be carried daily by the Metro, and the average trip-lengths will be about 5 km. Hence, a subsidy of Tk. 143.55 million will have to be paid daily and the yearly subsidy will be about Tk. 5240 crores.

The construction of Metros is often agonizingly slow. The 20 km Metro in Singapore was under construction for nearly 8 years. The Blue Line Subway (21 km.) in Bangkok was under construction for about 7 years.

Flexibility to expand and adaptability to a changing situation is also a key requirement for any mass transit system. Dhaka is rapidly growing and the situation in the city is rapidly changing. But the expansion of the Metro system is very complex.

Per kilometer construction cost of Metro is about hundred times more than that of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system, and thus the Metro system is likely to cover only a very small portion of the city and would be of far less use if the private auto users are not diverted to the Metro service.

According to the STP estimate, the Dhaka Metropolitan Study Area will generate daily 7 crore travel-trips of which only 8% of the trips will be served by Metro service. With an investment of Tk. 14,500 crores, the Metro system will not be able to solve more than 10 percent of the transportation problems of Dhaka City.

Elevated Expressways and Flyovers: The STP team has recommended a system of Elevated Expressways and Flyovers of about 29 km. length. The construction cost of this system will be about U.S. $ 0.9 billion or Taka 6200 crores.

Elevated expressways generate their own traffic diverted from other roads. They favour only a very small minority of people driving cars and autos, often simply shift congestion from one point to another in the network, increases in noise, pollution, congestion and fuel consumption. As the former Mayor of Bogotá, Enrique Penalosa once remarked, “There are two ways to destroy a city. One is through nuclear bombing, and the other is with elevated roads”. The STP study itself exposed the potential disastrous consequences of elevated expressways. Government subsidies provided to the use of elevated expressways only favour the richest segment of the population which is contrary to equity goals. Evidence suggests that existing flyovers have actually caused an increase in traffic congestion on the roads below the flyovers.

In Dhaka city (in 2004) only one percent of the population was owners of autos and individualized transport (private car, jeep, micro, station wagon and pick-up). Flyovers and elevated expressways constructed at a great public expense, will only serve the needs of less than one percent people who own an individualized transport. For the remaining 99 percent of the people, these projects offer little benefit beyond increased difficulties and congestion, because the road capacities below the flyovers are reduced by at least 20 percent of the original capacity. Such facilities are of little benefit to buses, since buses generally move at ground level given the need for passenger to board and alight. These are inaccessible to pedestrians and cannot be used by rickshaws. They do not benefit the very large majority of people in the city and portrays a policy which cannot be sustainable.

Elevated expressways can only be justified in the cities where almost all families own a car. But in case of Dhaka, where auto-ownership is only one percent, it will be a great blunder to build elevated expressways. The capital once invested on such projects becomes fixed with the land and become unable to be withdrawn any significant part of the investment through failure to command a fair return from it.

The construction of elevated expressways through densely populated urban areas is likely to have serious detrimental impacts on environment and door-to-door accessibility. In Seoul, South Korea, government recently tore down an elevated expressway when they realized that it worsened the situation without solving any problem.
The STP recommendations are biased and is detrimental to the economy of the country.

Though the STP recommendations have been claimed to be a multimodal solution, but the study refers to only fuel-dependent transports ignoring the contributions of fuel-free non-motorized transports and pedestrians. Fuel-free non-motorized transport and pedestrian movements represent more than 50 percent of the total trips, and short trips constitute 76 percent of total trips in Dhaka City. How can the STP transport model be regarded as valid when it ignores the majority of the trips?

The STP study has other weaknesses as well. In order to assess mobility of passengers in a mixed mode urban area, it is imperative to evaluate transport alternatives with respect to door-to-door trips. The trip time or trip distance represents only a portion of the travel. The total travel constitutes link travel time, walking time, waiting time and penalties of modal transfer, which have not been considered in the STP model. Hence, the recommendations of the STP model do not ensure that this will increase the convenience of mobility and access for the majority of the people.

The Strategic Transport Plan (STP) for Dhaka city has opted for a transportation strategy which is highly capital intensive and which will require about US. $ 5.52 billion or Taka 38,000 crore for its implementation, but the strategy will not be successful in solving the transportation problem of Dhaka City. The reason is explained below:

When the population of a city increases, the volume of traffic on the roads also increases, and as the volume of traffic on the roads increases, the transportation problem also increases,. The Strategic Transportation Plan for Dhaka City has been prepared for a population of 1,98,00,000 (within RAJUK area) in the year 2024. Beyond this period population of Dhaka City will grow at least at a growth rate of 3.0 percent per annum. Hence, the solution of transportation problem which has been given for a population of 1,98,00,000 will soon become ineffective at an increased level of population in the City.

]]> By: Nihad Choudhury http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3874 Nihad Choudhury Mon, 28 Jul 2008 08:28:25 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3874 The traffic commentary Nihad Choudhury MY article is in response to the recently published column "Spinning our wheels" by Mr. Nasim Manzur. Instead of simply agreeing with all the facts and figures given by the aforementioned writer, I would also like to reiterate some of the problems and possible solutions to solve this "metro-crisis." Although, I am an expatriate residing in New Jersey, I spent my entire childhood in Dhaka and, therefore, my article will be biased towards the capital. Mr. Manzur has pointed out Beijing's $ 28.1 billion injection to reduce traffic congestion during the Olympic Games. I would like to add that there are various driving restrictions in place for the games as well. For example, according to The New York Times, almost 70% of the estimated 300,000 cars registered to the Chinese government in the city will be off the roads. Along with that, trucks will be forbidden to enter the city for two months during the Olympics and the Paralympics soon after. That is a drop of almost 45% of total traffic according to Mr. Zhou Zhengyu, a spokesman for the city's traffic committee. In Dhaka's case, such a drop in vehicular transportation would be impracticable (unless we get the next Olympics!). According to a survey carried out by Democracy Watch, a majority of respondents identified worsening roads and unplanned repairs as the main causes of traffic jams. It is the respondents' belief that the software behind the package (i.e. legal framework, planning, management, etc) rather than the hardware (i.e. brick and mortar stuff), needs expansion. From my perspective, the other reasons behind these gridlocks are the simultaneous presence of motorised and non-motorised vehicles on the same roads and traffic mismanagement. To handle the first situation, the government has definitely been on the dot by banning rickshaws on several important roads. But, for the traffic mismanagement part, I believe there is room for improvement, especially in hotspots such as the intersections in Motijheel and Gulshan. But, the alternation of the Bengali temper and the education of a traffic sergeant, that's another matter altogether. In actuality, as well as peoples' views, Dhaka seriously lacks alternative modes of transportation for its burgeoning populace. As Prof. Nabi mentioned in his article in The Daily Star, and to voice the opinion of thousands of belligerent commuters, a Mass Rapid Transit system is definitely needed. But, instead of focusing on only the "billion dollar metro system," why don't we also consider the numerous water bodies within the city? With a little collaboration between the city officials and various affluent entrepreneurs, there are many lakes, not to mention the Buriganga river, that may provide a meaningful substitute for cars and buses. For example, in Amsterdam the city provides boats such as The Canal Bus and the Museumboot (The Museum Boat) to commute in and around the city. If geographers' predictions are correct, both Dhaka and Amsterdam will be underwater within the next 40 odd years. Well, I suppose the Dutch seem to be quite prepared for the catastrophe already. Finally, from the perspective of a resident of New Jersey, the state with the famous Turnpike and the Garden State Parkway, I believe the construction of a super-highway is a very viable solution. Although this may seem contradictory to the previous mentioned views regarding more roads, I believe that traffic and the masses should be directed not only around the city, but also out of it! Just envision a miniature Asian Highway within Bangladesh itself, running all the way from Lalmonirhat to Cox's Bazar. Even though a mammoth creation as such would be expensive, if toll-booths are placed in every exit to a district the returns would be an annuity of sorts. The main purpose would be to allow people to live outside Dhaka and yet have access to all the conveniences of the city. We agree that most commuters do spend half their journey complaining about the gridlock and road conditions. But, to be quite honest, the same conversations are carried on in most other metropolises as well. The only advantage that Dhaka residents may have over other cities would mainly be the saturation levels of the city planners. Dhaka is fairly young in comparison to many other metropolitan cities. Thus, it still has time to reallocate resources to solve this problem. But, gargantuan funds are required to initiate all these beautiful ideas. But, an optimist would agree that with a little help from local businessmen, and foreign investments (pssst The World Bank and ADB), that too could solved. Nihad Choudhury is a student at Rutgers University and welcomes all feedback at nihadchy@gmail.com. The traffic commentary
Nihad Choudhury

MY article is in response to the recently published column “Spinning our wheels” by Mr. Nasim Manzur. Instead of simply agreeing with all the facts and figures given by the aforementioned writer, I would also like to reiterate some of the problems and possible solutions to solve this “metro-crisis.” Although, I am an expatriate residing in New Jersey, I spent my entire childhood in Dhaka and, therefore, my article will be biased towards the capital.

Mr. Manzur has pointed out Beijing’s $ 28.1 billion injection to reduce traffic congestion during the Olympic Games. I would like to add that there are various driving restrictions in place for the games as well. For example, according to The New York Times, almost 70% of the estimated 300,000 cars registered to the Chinese government in the city will be off the roads.

Along with that, trucks will be forbidden to enter the city for two months during the Olympics and the Paralympics soon after. That is a drop of almost 45% of total traffic according to Mr. Zhou Zhengyu, a spokesman for the city’s traffic committee. In Dhaka’s case, such a drop in vehicular transportation would be impracticable (unless we get the next Olympics!).

According to a survey carried out by Democracy Watch, a majority of respondents identified worsening roads and unplanned repairs as the main causes of traffic jams. It is the respondents’ belief that the software behind the package (i.e. legal framework, planning, management, etc) rather than the hardware (i.e. brick and mortar stuff), needs expansion.

From my perspective, the other reasons behind these gridlocks are the simultaneous presence of motorised and non-motorised vehicles on the same roads and traffic mismanagement. To handle the first situation, the government has definitely been on the dot by banning rickshaws on several important roads. But, for the traffic mismanagement part, I believe there is room for improvement, especially in hotspots such as the intersections in Motijheel and Gulshan. But, the alternation of the Bengali temper and the education of a traffic sergeant, that’s another matter altogether.

In actuality, as well as peoples’ views, Dhaka seriously lacks alternative modes of transportation for its burgeoning populace. As Prof. Nabi mentioned in his article in The Daily Star, and to voice the opinion of thousands of belligerent commuters, a Mass Rapid Transit system is definitely needed. But, instead of focusing on only the “billion dollar metro system,” why don’t we also consider the numerous water bodies within the city?

With a little collaboration between the city officials and various affluent entrepreneurs, there are many lakes, not to mention the Buriganga river, that may provide a meaningful substitute for cars and buses. For example, in Amsterdam the city provides boats such as The Canal Bus and the Museumboot (The Museum Boat) to commute in and around the city. If geographers’ predictions are correct, both Dhaka and Amsterdam will be underwater within the next 40 odd years. Well, I suppose the Dutch seem to be quite prepared for the catastrophe already.

Finally, from the perspective of a resident of New Jersey, the state with the famous Turnpike and the Garden State Parkway, I believe the construction of a super-highway is a very viable solution. Although this may seem contradictory to the previous mentioned views regarding more roads, I believe that traffic and the masses should be directed not only around the city, but also out of it!

Just envision a miniature Asian Highway within Bangladesh itself, running all the way from Lalmonirhat to Cox’s Bazar. Even though a mammoth creation as such would be expensive, if toll-booths are placed in every exit to a district the returns would be an annuity of sorts. The main purpose would be to allow people to live outside Dhaka and yet have access to all the conveniences of the city.

We agree that most commuters do spend half their journey complaining about the gridlock and road conditions. But, to be quite honest, the same conversations are carried on in most other metropolises as well. The only advantage that Dhaka residents may have over other cities would mainly be the saturation levels of the city planners.

Dhaka is fairly young in comparison to many other metropolitan cities. Thus, it still has time to reallocate resources to solve this problem. But, gargantuan funds are required to initiate all these beautiful ideas. But, an optimist would agree that with a little help from local businessmen, and foreign investments (pssst The World Bank and ADB), that too could solved.

Nihad Choudhury is a student at Rutgers University and welcomes all feedback at nihadchy@gmail.com.

]]> By: Maruf Rhaman http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3867 Maruf Rhaman Sat, 26 Jul 2008 10:01:27 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3867 Bicycle Benefits?” Does Your Town Have “Bicycle Benefits?” There’s a guy on a bike riding up and down the east coast pitching a program called “Bicycle Benefits.” The guy is Ian Klepatar and BB is his program to encourage businesses to reward customers who arrive by bicycle. Simple and effective are two words to describe this program. A business chooses what reward to offer a customer who arrives on bike, the customer gets rewarded and everyone wins. The program is so brilliant and effective that I’ve asked Ian to send in updates from the road. He left his hometown near Saratoga, New York two weeks ago to start his trek around the east coast, talking up the benfits of “going by bike.” Klepatar attended the Washington DC Bike Summit then lit out for Boston. The first of many entries on his travels follows. Boston, MA: Today was like so many days that cyclists and bicycle advocates know all too well. Whether we are pushing for bike lanes on a new street in our community or getting cut-off, doored or disrespected among traffic flow while commuting to work, we know the feeling in others just “not getting it.” Unlike the past three days since I arrived in Boston, business owners didn’t really seem to be that interested in the benefits of bicycles. ‘You know there aren’t really that many bikers that come in this restaurant’ they tell me. I guess in my eyes, if somebody knows how to ride a bicycle, they are automatically a biker. At the same time just because we ride bicycles, it doesn’t make us bikers. So I go on to tell the uninterested owner the benefits of participating in a program which promotes physical activity, helmet use, alleviating congestion and parking hassle. The concept of the program is pretty basic. Businesses in the community offer discounts/rewards in order to entice community members to jump on their bicycles and visit the restaurants/businesses by bicycle. Upon arriving by bicycle and showing the affixed Bicycle Benefit helmet sticker, the individual receives the designated discount/reward. However, just as we often struggle to convey the many benefits of bicycle paths connecting neighborhoods to community centers or the importance of complete streets http://www.completestreets.org/ legislation to our elected politicians, I too wonder why some people don’t get it…Perhaps it’s been a while since we all felt the joy and benefits of riding a bicycle. info@1world2wheels.org Bicycle Benefits?”

Does Your Town Have “Bicycle Benefits?”

There’s a guy on a bike riding up and down the east coast pitching a program called “Bicycle Benefits.” The guy is Ian Klepatar and BB is his program to encourage businesses to reward customers who arrive by bicycle.
Simple and effective are two words to describe this program. A business chooses what reward to offer a customer who arrives on bike, the customer gets rewarded and everyone wins.
The program is so brilliant and effective that I’ve asked Ian to send in updates from the road. He left his hometown near Saratoga, New York two weeks ago to start his trek around the east coast, talking up the benfits of “going by bike.” Klepatar attended the Washington DC Bike Summit then lit out for Boston. The first of many entries on his travels follows.
Boston, MA: Today was like so many days that cyclists and bicycle advocates know all too well. Whether we are pushing for bike lanes on a new street in our community or getting cut-off, doored or disrespected among traffic flow while commuting to work, we know the feeling in others just “not getting it.” Unlike the past three days since I arrived in Boston, business owners didn’t really seem to be that interested in the benefits of bicycles. ‘You know there aren’t really that many bikers that come in this restaurant’ they tell me. I guess in my eyes, if somebody knows how to ride a bicycle, they are automatically a biker. At the same time just because we ride bicycles, it doesn’t make us bikers. So I go on to tell the uninterested owner the benefits of participating in a program which promotes physical activity, helmet use, alleviating congestion and parking hassle. The concept of the program is pretty basic. Businesses in the community offer discounts/rewards in order to entice community members to jump on their bicycles and visit the restaurants/businesses by bicycle. Upon arriving by bicycle and showing the affixed Bicycle Benefit helmet sticker, the individual receives the designated discount/reward. However, just as we often struggle to convey the many benefits of bicycle paths connecting neighborhoods to community centers or the importance of complete streets http://www.completestreets.org/ legislation to our elected politicians, I too wonder why some people don’t get it…Perhaps it’s been a while since we all felt the joy and benefits of riding a bicycle.

info@1world2wheels.org

]]> By: RICKSHAWS AGAINST GLOBAL WARMING! http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3866 RICKSHAWS AGAINST GLOBAL WARMING! Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:57:31 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3866 RICKSHAWS AGAINST GLOBAL WARMING! conference in Bali this week, to haggle over how best to tackle climate change, they should spare a thought for the humble bicycle rickshaw drivers of New Delhi. The rickshaw wallahs, as they're known locally, have invoked the battle against global warming in their fight to be allowed to stay on the crowded streets of the Indian capital. I first learned about the plight of the wallahs on a recent visit to the city when the wheezing old taxi I was riding in nearly ran a rickshaw off the road. This isn't altogether unusual in India, where traffic runs on the principle of survival of the fittest – or at least the biggest. Ian Williams / NBC News A rickshaw travels across the busy streets of New Delhi, India. All the same, my driver's reaction seemed unusually hostile. The rickshaw shouldn't be on the road, clogging it up, he snarled, and anyway it was now illegal for them to come to this part of town. That surprised me too, since I've yet to find any Delhi driver who regards traffic rules as anything more than advisory. I decided to investigate further, since I rather like the old rickshaws. They may not be much to look at, and sitting behind a sweating, straining cyclist, his rickshaw squeaking and wobbling amid the Delhi gridlock, might be regarded by some as rather cruel. But to me Indian cities just wouldn't be the same without them. 'Modern' enough? In Delhi alone there are more than 80,000 licensed rickshaws, though the number is estimated to be more than five times that. In some parts of the bustling old city, they can be the only way of accessing narrow lanes. I soon discovered that, yes, the Delhi authorities have indeed banned them from Delhi's main corridors as well as parts of the old city. But the wallahs are fighting back, and feisty local environmentalists have taken up their cause. The NGO, Initiative for Transportation and Development Programs, has challenged the ban in the Delhi High Court demanding the authorities provide a dedicated track for the cycle rickshaws on all main roads. They told the court the ban on rickshaws would worsen air pollution if cars replaced them. The police told the court that getting rid of the rickshaws would help make Delhi a "modern" city. "Delhi traffic police are of the opinion that cycle-rickshaws are extremely traffic hazardous and accident-prone," they said in a statement to the court. They said traffic was a nightmare because of the "infiltration," of cycle-rickshaws. Serious stuff. Cycle rickshaws may not conform to the Delhi police's view of what makes a modern city, but many capitals of more developed countries are beginning to see them as part of the solution to environmental problems. They can now be seen in London, Oxford, Paris, Singapore – even New York City, where they are called pedicabs. And London's considering a system of licensing for cycle rickshaws. And as for the pollution, Delhi's Center for Science and Environment is warning that the city faces a winter of smog, with heightened risk of respiratory diseases, because the staggering increase in the number of motor vehicles, particularly diesel-fueled cars. It's not the first time an Indian city has tried to get rid of rickshaws. Calcutta tried recently to ban the hand-pulled variety, the city's communist authorities arguing these leftovers from the days of the British Raj are inhumane. But the rickshaw pullers don't see it that way and so far they're refusing to give way. In Delhi, the High Court is still chewing over the environmentalists' petition. While I do hope something of substance comes out of Bali this week, I have my doubts. It may well be that local battles like the one being fought by Delhi's rickshaw wallahs make more difference than two weeks of talking in the sun in the luxury of an Indonesian tropical island. RICKSHAWS AGAINST GLOBAL WARMING!

conference in Bali this week, to haggle over how best to tackle climate change, they should spare a thought for the humble bicycle rickshaw drivers of New Delhi.
The rickshaw wallahs, as they’re known locally, have invoked the battle against global warming in their fight to be allowed to stay on the crowded streets of the Indian capital.

I first learned about the plight of the wallahs on a recent visit to the city when the wheezing old taxi I was riding in nearly ran a rickshaw off the road. This isn’t altogether unusual in India, where traffic runs on the principle of survival of the fittest – or at least the biggest.

Ian Williams / NBC News
A rickshaw travels across the busy streets of New Delhi, India.

All the same, my driver’s reaction seemed unusually hostile. The rickshaw shouldn’t be on the road, clogging it up, he snarled, and anyway it was now illegal for them to come to this part of town.

That surprised me too, since I’ve yet to find any Delhi driver who regards traffic rules as anything more than advisory.

I decided to investigate further, since I rather like the old rickshaws. They may not be much to look at, and sitting behind a sweating, straining cyclist, his rickshaw squeaking and wobbling amid the Delhi gridlock, might be regarded by some as rather cruel. But to me Indian cities just wouldn’t be the same without them.

‘Modern’ enough?
In Delhi alone there are more than 80,000 licensed rickshaws, though the number is estimated to be more than five times that. In some parts of the bustling old city, they can be the only way of accessing narrow lanes.

I soon discovered that, yes, the Delhi authorities have indeed banned them from Delhi’s main corridors as well as parts of the old city.

But the wallahs are fighting back, and feisty local environmentalists have taken up their cause.

The NGO, Initiative for Transportation and Development Programs, has challenged the ban in the Delhi High Court demanding the authorities provide a dedicated track for the cycle rickshaws on all main roads.

They told the court the ban on rickshaws would worsen air pollution if cars replaced them.

The police told the court that getting rid of the rickshaws would help make Delhi a “modern” city.

“Delhi traffic police are of the opinion that cycle-rickshaws are extremely traffic hazardous and accident-prone,” they said in a statement to the court. They said traffic was a nightmare because of the “infiltration,” of cycle-rickshaws.

Serious stuff.

Cycle rickshaws may not conform to the Delhi police’s view of what makes a modern city, but many capitals of more developed countries are beginning to see them as part of the solution to environmental problems. They can now be seen in London, Oxford, Paris, Singapore – even New York City, where they are called pedicabs. And London’s considering a system of licensing for cycle rickshaws.

And as for the pollution, Delhi’s Center for Science and Environment is warning that the city faces a winter of smog, with heightened risk of respiratory diseases, because the staggering increase in the number of motor vehicles, particularly diesel-fueled cars.

It’s not the first time an Indian city has tried to get rid of rickshaws. Calcutta tried recently to ban the hand-pulled variety, the city’s communist authorities arguing these leftovers from the days of the British Raj are inhumane. But the rickshaw pullers don’t see it that way and so far they’re refusing to give way.

In Delhi, the High Court is still chewing over the environmentalists’ petition.

While I do hope something of substance comes out of Bali this week, I have my doubts. It may well be that local battles like the one being fought by Delhi’s rickshaw wallahs make more difference than two weeks of talking in the sun in the luxury of an Indonesian tropical island.

]]> By: Rickshaw ban: a bane or boon? http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3865 Rickshaw ban: a bane or boon? Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:41:06 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3865 Rickshaw ban: a bane or boon? To a person like me who has spent the major portion of his life in the vintage streets and lanes of Shahjahanabad, or the Mughal-built Old Delhi, riding on horse carts and rickshaws, the blanket ban on cycle rickshaws by the Delhi High Court has come as a shock. I feel that courts that otherwise are doing yeomen service to the cause of justice at times pass orders that are not people-friendly. May be for the Chandni Chowk traders, this initiative might come as a breather because they have been complaining about traffic congestion. But there are many for whom the decision sounds the death knell. Mullaji, a rickshaw puller I know in the Chandni Chowk area, is shocked. Only recently he admitted his son in one of the English medium schools of the area, after saving from his daily earnings of around Rs.200. He is apprehensive about his son’s future following the ban. While people in the area clearly seem to be divided, the rickshaw pullers’ voice, those whose daily bread is endangered, is going unheard. Pedalling tirelessly, come rain, biting cold, winds or scorching sun, these hard working men tell heart-rending tales about how they support big families with ailing elders and children. Even the tourists who relish cycle rickshaw rides are taken aback by the ban. It is said there are around 580,000 rickshaws on Delhi roads. Of this, about 80,000 are only licensed. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), it is alleged, makes a huge sum of money from the illegal unlicensed rickshaws. Chandni Chowk Sarv Vyapar Mandal, a trader association in Old Delhi, had filed in the Delhi High Court in February 2002 a petition seeking the restriction of the number of cycle rickshaws in the area, citing the fear that traffic in Chandni Chowk from Gauri Shankar Mandir to Fatehpuri is highly choked due to the presence of unlimited number of cycle rickshaws and unauthorized occupation of road by vendors. As an activist from the walled city, I feel the association should have sought a viable solution to the traffic problem rather than a ban on the rickshaws. Many residents of the area feel that the ban is not justified because the elders, women and children rely on rickshaws to commute. Also people prefer open rickshaws to being dumped into crowded buses. True “eco-friendly” buses are there now. But do they solve the problem? The traffic jams could also be due to the large number of private cars and auto-rickshaws. A whole lot of categories of vehicles might also be banned for environmental reasons. The notion that a cycle rickshaw generates more traffic congestion than a private car is unjustified and untenable. Moreover, the new buses meant for Chandni Chowk will have a problem of parking as well. Cycle-Rickshaw Chalak Malik Sangharsh Association president Shashi Bhushan says the cycle rickshaws are now plying in Oxford in London, Paris municipality areas and Singapore. In Delhi people need cycle rickshaws for transport, the pullers need them as a source of income. For the elderly women, sick and children, rickshaws are like independent cars on hire, as they like to travel freely for reason of comfort. The old and sick would be picked from their doorstep in narrow lanes and be dropped where a car or other transport cannot ply. As cycle rickshaws play an important role in short distance travel, banning them would be problematic for short distance commuters. The court is also of the view that “plying of cycle rickshaws on Delhi roads by poor rickshaw pullers is against human dignity and it results in the exploitation of the poor people who as last resort take upon themselves the work of rickshaw pullers at the mercy of influential people owning such cycle rickshaws.” Very true, but what about their livelihood now. It would have been a humane act if surrogate occupation was provided to them. In Kolkata, the situation is far worse as the rickshaw pullers have to run bare feet on potholed roads but if they are deprived of their rickshaws out of a strange sympathy for their human dignity, they would have nothing to do other than begging. It is better if the issue is subjected to public referendum. Rather than a blanket ban, need of the hour is to study the problem minutely. What the state government requires is that a policy be designed to regulate the rickshaws not only in Chandni Chowk but the whole of the walled city. It would be better to regulate a system with the help of NGOs and associations like Cycle-Rickshaw Chalak Malik Sangharsh Association. After all, these rickshaws are an inveterate part of Chandni Chowk culture. (Firoz Bakht Ahmed is a commentator on culture, heritage and Delhi history. He can be contacted at firozbakht@rediffmail.com) Indo-Asian News Service Rickshaw ban: a bane or boon?

To a person like me who has spent the major portion of his life in the vintage streets and lanes of Shahjahanabad, or the Mughal-built Old Delhi, riding on horse carts and rickshaws, the blanket ban on cycle rickshaws by the Delhi High Court has come as a shock. I feel that courts that otherwise are doing yeomen service to the cause of justice at times pass orders that are not people-friendly.

May be for the Chandni Chowk traders, this initiative might come as a breather because they have been complaining about traffic congestion. But there are many for whom the decision sounds the death knell.

Mullaji, a rickshaw puller I know in the Chandni Chowk area, is shocked. Only recently he admitted his son in one of the English medium schools of the area, after saving from his daily earnings of around Rs.200. He is apprehensive about his son’s future following the ban.

While people in the area clearly seem to be divided, the rickshaw pullers’ voice, those whose daily bread is endangered, is going unheard.

Pedalling tirelessly, come rain, biting cold, winds or scorching sun, these hard working men tell heart-rending tales about how they support big families with ailing elders and children.

Even the tourists who relish cycle rickshaw rides are taken aback by the ban.

It is said there are around 580,000 rickshaws on Delhi roads. Of this, about 80,000 are only licensed. The Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), it is alleged, makes a huge sum of money from the illegal unlicensed rickshaws.

Chandni Chowk Sarv Vyapar Mandal, a trader association in Old Delhi, had filed in the Delhi High Court in February 2002 a petition seeking the restriction of the number of cycle rickshaws in the area, citing the fear that traffic in Chandni Chowk from Gauri Shankar Mandir to Fatehpuri is highly choked due to the presence of unlimited number of cycle rickshaws and unauthorized occupation of road by vendors.

As an activist from the walled city, I feel the association should have sought a viable solution to the traffic problem rather than a ban on the rickshaws. Many residents of the area feel that the ban is not justified because the elders, women and children rely on rickshaws to commute. Also people prefer open rickshaws to being dumped into crowded buses.

True “eco-friendly” buses are there now. But do they solve the problem? The traffic jams could also be due to the large number of private cars and auto-rickshaws. A whole lot of categories of vehicles might also be banned for environmental reasons. The notion that a cycle rickshaw generates more traffic congestion than a private car is unjustified and untenable. Moreover, the new buses meant for Chandni Chowk will have a problem of parking as well.

Cycle-Rickshaw Chalak Malik Sangharsh Association president Shashi Bhushan says the cycle rickshaws are now plying in Oxford in London, Paris municipality areas and Singapore.

In Delhi people need cycle rickshaws for transport, the pullers need them as a source of income. For the elderly women, sick and children, rickshaws are like independent cars on hire, as they like to travel freely for reason of comfort. The old and sick would be picked from their doorstep in narrow lanes and be dropped where a car or other transport cannot ply. As cycle rickshaws play an important role in short distance travel, banning them would be problematic for short distance commuters.

The court is also of the view that “plying of cycle rickshaws on Delhi roads by poor rickshaw pullers is against human dignity and it results in the exploitation of the poor people who as last resort take upon themselves the work of rickshaw pullers at the mercy of influential people owning such cycle rickshaws.” Very true, but what about their livelihood now. It would have been a humane act if surrogate occupation was provided to them.

In Kolkata, the situation is far worse as the rickshaw pullers have to run bare feet on potholed roads but if they are deprived of their rickshaws out of a strange sympathy for their human dignity, they would have nothing to do other than begging.

It is better if the issue is subjected to public referendum. Rather than a blanket ban, need of the hour is to study the problem minutely. What the state government requires is that a policy be designed to regulate the rickshaws not only in Chandni Chowk but the whole of the walled city. It would be better to regulate a system with the help of NGOs and associations like Cycle-Rickshaw Chalak Malik Sangharsh Association.

After all, these rickshaws are an inveterate part of Chandni Chowk culture.

(Firoz Bakht Ahmed is a commentator on culture, heritage and Delhi history. He can be contacted at firozbakht@rediffmail.com)
Indo-Asian News Service

]]> By: Jakarta Busway System Could Save Rp 235 Billion in Subsidies http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3864 Jakarta Busway System Could Save Rp 235 Billion in Subsidies Sat, 26 Jul 2008 09:35:51 +0000 http://voiceofsouth.org/2008/01/03/rickshaw_bans/#comment-3864 Jakarta Busway System Could Save Rp 235 Billion in Subsidies 02 Jul 2008 Posted In: Jakarta BRT, Developing High-Quality, Low-Cost Mass Transit, Indonesia If private vehicle users switched to taking the busway, the administration could save hundreds of billions of rupiahs, the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) estimates. Agnes Winarti, The Jakarta Post If private vehicle users switched to taking the busway, the administration could save hundreds of billions of rupiahs, the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) estimates. “On the assumption that private vehicles travel an average of 10 kilometers in an hour, Rp 235 billion (US$25.8 million) would be saved in fuel subsidies a year if private vehicle users switched to the busway,” ITDP national director Milatia Kusuma Mu’min said at a seminar Tuesday. The seminar on economical efficiency prospects through improving public transportation services was held by the ITDP, the Indonesian Transportation Community and the University of Indonesia’s engineering faculty alumni association. The Transjakarta busway routes are Blok M-Kota, Pulo Gadung-Harmoni, Kalideres-Harmoni, Pulo Gadung-Dukuh Atas, Ancol-Kampung Melayu, Ragunan-Kuningan, and Kampung Rambutan-Kampung Melayu. Milatia said if the busway system utilized all 14 corridors, the government would save Rp 963 billion in fuel subsidies a year. A fully functioning busway system can carry up to 900,000 passengers per day, while after the recent fuel price increases, the number of busway passengers has increased from 210,000 to around 225,000 a day. ITDP data shows there were only 30,000 passengers a day in the busway’s first operational year in 2004. According to the New York-based ITDP, bus services have evolved from an informal transit service to conventional bus services, then to basic busways and eventually full Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems. “Jakarta’s busway system is currently seen as a basic busway. So, it still needs to be upgraded to be a fully functioning BRT system. There’s no instant solution,” she said. Basic busway services are characterized by segregated or single corridor services, on-board fare collection, basic bus shelters and standard bus vehicles. The fully functioning BRT refers to an integrated network of routes and corridors, enclosed and high-quality stations, pre-board fare collection, frequent and rapid services and the use of clean technology. Looking toward a full BRT system, the Tranjakarta busway is expected to set up an integrated electronic fare collection system, integrated modes of public transport with excellent feeder services, as well as supporting policies through appropriate traffic demand management and transit oriented development. “A good feeder service is not available yet,” Mila said. She said it was important to start preparing for manual feeder services, like bicycle facilities, as well as motorized services. Head of the logistics and transportation study center at Gadjah Mada University, Heru Sutomo, said although Corridor I has been a success, the construction of other corridors have been too fast and too ambitious, and have overshadowed the need for feeder services. For the long term, bus and train stations must be developed in a more user friendly way, Heru said. The distance from stations to housing complexes, offices, shopping centers, social facilities should be shorter and they should provide easier access to other forms of public and private transportation and sidewalks. To access the original article, click on the link below: Jakarta Busway System Could Save Rp 235 Billion in Subsidies
02 Jul 2008

Posted In: Jakarta BRT, Developing High-Quality, Low-Cost Mass Transit, Indonesia

If private vehicle users switched to taking the busway, the administration could save hundreds of billions of rupiahs, the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) estimates.

Agnes Winarti, The Jakarta Post

If private vehicle users switched to taking the busway, the administration could save hundreds of billions of rupiahs, the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) estimates.

“On the assumption that private vehicles travel an average of 10 kilometers in an hour, Rp 235 billion (US$25.8 million) would be saved in fuel subsidies a year if private vehicle users switched to the busway,” ITDP national director Milatia Kusuma Mu’min said at a seminar Tuesday.

The seminar on economical efficiency prospects through improving public transportation services was held by the ITDP, the Indonesian Transportation Community and the University of Indonesia’s engineering faculty alumni association.

The Transjakarta busway routes are Blok M-Kota, Pulo Gadung-Harmoni, Kalideres-Harmoni, Pulo Gadung-Dukuh Atas, Ancol-Kampung Melayu, Ragunan-Kuningan, and Kampung Rambutan-Kampung Melayu.

Milatia said if the busway system utilized all 14 corridors, the government would save Rp 963 billion in fuel subsidies a year.

A fully functioning busway system can carry up to 900,000 passengers per day, while after the recent fuel price increases, the number of busway passengers has increased from 210,000 to around 225,000 a day.

ITDP data shows there were only 30,000 passengers a day in the busway’s first operational year in 2004.

According to the New York-based ITDP, bus services have evolved from an informal transit service to conventional bus services, then to basic busways and eventually full Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems.

“Jakarta’s busway system is currently seen as a basic busway. So, it still needs to be upgraded to be a fully functioning BRT system. There’s no instant solution,” she said.

Basic busway services are characterized by segregated or single corridor services, on-board fare collection, basic bus shelters and standard bus vehicles.

The fully functioning BRT refers to an integrated network of routes and corridors, enclosed and high-quality stations, pre-board fare collection, frequent and rapid services and the use of clean technology.

Looking toward a full BRT system, the Tranjakarta busway is expected to set up an integrated electronic fare collection system, integrated modes of public transport with excellent feeder services, as well as supporting policies through appropriate traffic demand management and transit oriented development.

“A good feeder service is not available yet,” Mila said.

She said it was important to start preparing for manual feeder services, like bicycle facilities, as well as motorized services.

Head of the logistics and transportation study center at Gadjah Mada University, Heru Sutomo, said although Corridor I has been a success, the construction of other corridors have been too fast and too ambitious, and have overshadowed the need for feeder services.

For the long term, bus and train stations must be developed in a more user friendly way, Heru said. The distance from stations to housing complexes, offices, shopping centers, social facilities should be shorter and they should provide easier access to other forms of public and private transportation and sidewalks.

To access the original article, click on the link below:

]]>