Jahangirnagar Planning Review ISSN 1728-4198

Vol. 6, June 2008, pp. 69-81, © Jahangirnagar University

Future Mass Rapid Transit in Dhaka City: Options, Issues and Realities

Md. Saidur Rahman*

Abstract

Transport is the life of a city and choices on public transit options are fundamental decisions
about a city’s future growth and development. An efficient transportation system increases
accessibility and improves quality of life. In terms of maintaining a transit-friendly city form
and ensuring the urban poor have access to work, the selection of an appropriate Mass Rapid
Transit (MRT) system is a crucial factor to secure long term advances – or at least to stabilize
the share of people traveling by public rather than private transport. Though Dhaka is one of the
least motorized cities in the world, its traffic congestion is the most common phenomenon in our
everyday life. This paper reviews the recent mass transit planning initiatives in developing
countries and analyzes the alternative choices of each of the main MRT options for Dhaka City
and identifies the issues and realities of such initiatives under Dhaka’s present geo-political and
socioeconomic contexts.

Introduction

Most urban public transport, especially in developing countries, are road based, but the major cities of the
world have a long history of building and developing rail-based transportation systems to provide the
backbone of public transport supply along key corridors. Road-based public transport, given adequate
operational support can handle peak corridor flows up to a certain level, but higher flows necessitate a
‘heavy’ rail-based system with a higher capacity. Rail (particularly the light rail and tram systems) is also
justified (in preference to a road-based system) for lower passenger flows on such grounds as being less
polluting and presenting a better urban image.

‘Mass Rapid Transit’ (MRT) is a term used to describe modes of urban public transport (both road and rail
based) that carry large volumes of passengers quickly. It comprises a spectrum of modes of urban public
transport that use specific fixed-track or exclusive and separated use of a potentially common-user road
track. The role and form of MRT of course depends upon the city context, its size, income level, asset base,
institutions, existing transport systems and other cultural and behavioral factors and attitudes.

MRT policy and city sustainability are inextricably linked. In the era of globalization, city authorities
recognize the need for their city to compete in the global marketplace, and MRT is seen to be part of the
‘package’ to attract inward investment. The effectiveness with which MRT policy is implemented, and the
parallel complementary measures which are implemented, will substantially influence the city’s future. For
a rapidly growing city like Dhaka, MRT decisions will arguably be of great strategic importance. But the
core question for decision-makers is how to balance the sometimes conflicting objectives of poverty
alleviation (which implies a low tariff/quality MRT system) and controlling congestion with its associated
pollution and safety costs (which implies a higher tariff/quality MRT system) within the means of
government budgets. Large cities in developing world are centers of economic growth and magnets for poor
people from the countryside. The issue at the heart of poverty alleviation is that all MRT systems have
multiple impacts on the poor and the environment, and to assess the overall impacts is by no means
straightforward. So the development of MRT systems should be carried out in a holistic manner within the
context of a city development plan and transport strategy. This paper examines the technical and economic
advantages of the most widely used MRT systems for developing cities.

* Executive Engineer of Bangladesh Railway, presently under deputation pursuing higher studies in Transportation
Engineering at Hiroshima University, Japan. E-mail: srmilan@gmail.com
Jahangirnagar Planning Review 70

Overview of Dhaka and Its Transportation System

Being the administrative, commercial & cultural capital of Bangladesh, the Mega City Dhaka has a major
role to play in the socioeconomic development of the country and in the era of regional and sub-regional
cooperation. But the existing transportation system is a major bottleneck for the development of the city.
Unplanned urbanization, especially poor transportation planning and lower land utilization efficiency, has
turned the city into a dangerous urban jungle. Dhaka has recently received the dubious distinction of being
the second dirtiest city in the world (Forbes, 2008).

Although Dhaka’s area is less than 1% of the country’s total land area, it supports about 10% of the total
population and 30% of the total urban population. During the last four decades Dhaka has recorded a
phenomenal growth in terms of population and area. Dhaka City is presently one of the 10th largest Mega-
cities of the world with a population of about 14.0 million having the highest annual growth rate and
expected to be the second largest city of the world with a population of 22.8 million by 2015 (UNFPA,
2001). The rapid rise in population along with increased and versatile urban land use patterns has generated
considerable travel demand as well as numerous transport problems in Dhaka City. It has resulted in
deterioration in accessibility, level of service, safety, comfort, operational efficiency and urban environment.
The additional population in coming decades will add new dimensions to the urban fabric of Dhaka.

The transportation system of Dhaka is predominantly road based and non-motorized transportation (mainly
rickshaws) has a substantial share. Dhaka’s road network is nearly 3000 kms (of which 200 km primary, 110
km secondary, 50 km feeder and 2640 km narrow roads) with few alternative connector roads and it
represents the proportion of road surface to built-up area hardly 7% as against 25% recommended for a good
city planning. Only 400 kms footpath is available for pedestrian of which 40% are being occupied illegally
by vendors and others. There are no effective bi-cycle lanes and safe walkways even. Although 37-km long
rail-road passes through the heart of the city but it has little contribution to city’s transport system due to
policy constraints. Although the motorization level in Dhaka is till very low comparing to similar sized
cities of the world, the rate of increase of various types of vehicles in recent years is significant. Figure-1
shows the incremental growth of motorized vehicles in Dhaka city over time. More than 500,000 rickshaws
ply on Dhaka’s roads (STP, 2005). There are around 100 open markets on the streets and 3000 shopping
malls beside the roads without adequate parking provisions. Most of the signals are manually controlled and
insufficient traffic policemen are to control the traffic.

450000
Motor Car Jeep/ Microbus
400000 Taxi Bus
Minibus Truck
350000 Auto-rickshaw Motor-Cycle
Others
Number of Vehicles

300000

250000

200000

150000

100000

50000

0
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Year

Figure-1: Motor Vehicles Growth Trends in Dhaka City over Time (1994-2006)
Source: BRTA, 2007
71 Future Mass Rapid Transit in Dhaka City: Options, Issues and Realities

Dhaka’s transport environment is characterized by mixed-modes transports using the same road space,
traffic congestion, delays, mismanagement, conflict of jurisdictions, poor coordination among organizations
and increasing environmental problems. The distribution of modal choices in Dhaka is unique among cities
of comparable size in the world. The primary mode of transport is particularly interesting, with about a third
(34%) using rickshaws, almost half (44%) using transit/buses; and a quarter (22%) comprised of walk (14%)
and non-transit motorized (8%) modes (STP, 2005). Current average trip length is 5.37 kms (by buses 8.40
kms; by rickshaws 2.34 kms) and across all modes of travel average trip time is about 15 minutes.
Pedestrian volumes of 10,000 to 20,000 per day are common and reach as high as 30,000 to 50,000 per day
in the Old City area. Only about 2% households own a bicycle. Buses & minibuses are the cheapest mode
available as mass transit and average cost of transport ranges from about 8% of household income for high
income groups to 17% for low income groups (DITS, 1993). Large groups within the society have very poor
access to transport services. Since 1995 to 2005, the roads of Dhaka have increased only by 5%, but
population and traffic have increased by over 50% and 134% respectively.

Transport service in Dhaka has several deficiencies resulting from a combination of factors - physical,
developmental and institutional-cum-policy framework-related which lead to lower efficiency, higher
transport costs, longer waiting & travel time, discomfort and more significantly, “transport unreliability”
with major adverse consequence for the economy & environment. An example of the absence of good traffic
management and coordination among agencies is the chaotic disorder that exists in many areas of Dhaka
today. Rapid population growth, the absence of planning control and poor economic conditions have
contributed to the lack of organization on the public rights-of-way. There is also a high level of operation
disorder, which significantly diminishes the efficiency and effectiveness of the existing transport systems.
The present bus services (operated under as many as 750 individual ownerships) provide inefficient,
unproductive, and unsafe level of services. Long waiting, delay on plying, overloading, discomfort, and long
walking distance from the residence/work place to bus stoppages are some of the obvious problems that
confront the users in their daily life. In peak hours they very often load and unload in unspecified stops. It is
a common practice in rush hours to deny access to the old, women, and children passengers, because this
group has a tendency to avoid fighting during boarding and alighting.

Today the mega city Dhaka is one of the world’s crowded & congested cities. Many have expressed their
apprehension that Dhaka is destined to be the world’s largest slum, if we make further delays to take
corrective measures. Its traffic congestion not only causes increased costs, loss of time & psychological
strain, but also poses serious threats to our socioeconomic environment. With its present situation of traffic
systems, the city stands in dire need for a radical transformation in the structural sense. Until and unless
there is immediate and effective solution, the system will collapse. We need to take comprehensive view of
the present shortcomings and future potentialities of the metropolis to identify and work out plans for
formulating strategies to standardize the efficiency of traffic flow and effectiveness of transportation system
because choices about transportation system concern the kind of city we want to live in. To maintain the
economic viability of this city and to keep its environment sustainable, an efficient mass transportation
system is imperative.

MRT Options and Current MRT Activities in Developing Cities

The distinction between MRT concepts is fluid, and many different approaches are commonly used to
distinguish the different modes and features of various MRT systems. Traditionally, MRT systems have
been categorized according to technology and degree of segregation from traffic. Table-1 summarizes the
key features of the MRT options. Some typical MRT systems in developing cities are outlined in Table-2.
Jahangirnagar Planning Review 72

Bus Rapid Transit: Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a form of customer-oriented transit combining stations,
vehicles, planning, and intelligent transport systems elements into an integrated system with a unique
identity, usually uses dedicated Right of Way (ROW), which may be either bus-ways (involving physical
segregation of the track) or bus-lanes (using painted lines to demarcate the ROW). BRT systems usually
include additional design and operational features to increase passenger capacity, such as well-designed bus
stops, organized operations, efficient collection methods and clearly defined corridors. Presently various
BRT systems operate or under construction in many developing cities, such as Bogota, Curitiba, Campinas,
Goiania, Belo Horizonte, Porto Algre, Quito, Recife, Sao Paulo, Shantiago, Cuenca, Guatemala, Lima,
Mexico City, Istanbul, Kunming, Shanghai, Beijing, Chengdu, Jinan, Xian, Chongqing, Taipei, Seoul,
Bangalore, Delhi, Jakarta, Ha Noi, Ho Chi Minh etc.

Table-1： Key Features Of MRT Systems

Bus Rapid Light Rail Suburban
Characteristics Metro
Transit (BRT) Transit (LRT) Rail
Most
Widespread in
Most European Most Developed cities European &
Current Latin America &
& North & few large North
Applications some developing
American cities developing cities American
cities
cities
Mostly elevated or
Segregation At grade At grade At grade
underground
Little impact on
2-4 lanes from 2-3 lanes from
Space requirement existing road if -
existing road existing road
elevated/underground
Depends on Depends on Depends on
Impact on Traffic Reduces congestion
policy & design policy & design frequency
Public Transit Problematic with Usually
Often difficult Excellent
Integration paratransit existing
15-30 at grade
Initial cost
0.5-15 13-50 30-75 elevated -
(US$ million/km)
60-180 underground
Implementation
Short Medium Long -
time
Interaction with
Good Very good Excellent Variable
land development
Mainly
Fuel Electricity Electricity Electricity
Diesel/CNG/LPG
Air pollution &
Considerable Low Low Low
noise
Capacity
10-35,000 12-30,000 60,000+ 30,000
(pass./hr/direction)
Speed (km/hr) 17-20 20-50 30-80 40-45+
Minor (at level
Traffic Accident Minor Minor No
crossing)
System image &
passenger Good Very Good Excellent Variable
attraction
Sources: GTZ, 2005 ; World Bank, 2001 & 2002
73 Future Mass Rapid Transit in Dhaka City: Options, Issues and Realities

Light rail transit: Light Rail Transit (LRT) is a metropolitan modern electric railway system characterized
by its ability to operate single car or short trains at ground level, aerial structures, in subways, or
occasionally in streets, and employs a fully segregated, often grade-separated ROW & advanced control
systems, but uses less massive equipment & infrastructure. LRT is the modern version of the tram or
streetcar or trolley in many locals and has better images over busways. LRT is only operational in a few
developing cities – notably Tunis, Shanghai, Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur, Putra, Manila, Istanbul and
Mexico City. Recent examples of LRT systems in developing cities include the elevated Putra and monorail
systems in Kuala Lumpur, Tren de la Costa of Buenos Aires and Shanghai’s Pearl Line.

Metros: Metros, often designated as true heavy rapid transit, use fully segregated, and grade-separated
track in central areas, the track may be elevated although the most common international term is for subway
or underground. They employ very advanced control systems that allow high-frequency operations, and the
trains are made up of multiple units of high-capacity ‘heavy’ cars. They can provide high levels of service
(speeds and frequency) having the highest theoretical capacity, although they are also the most expensive
form of MRT system. Metros in developing cities carried about 11 billion journeys in 2000, more than twice
the ridership of commuter rail and more than four times the ridership of LRT systems (GTZ, 2005). Metro
systems are being developed or expanded in several developing cities, such as Bangkok, Santiago de Chile,
Kuala Lumpur, Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Sao Paulo, Buenos Aires, Mexico City, Cairo, Dubai, Ankara,
Manila, Beijing, Shanghai, Taipei, Hong Kong and many other parts of the world. There is extensive metro
activity and substantial future activity is under planning or underway in many cities. Figure-2 shows how
the number of metro systems worldwide increase over time.

200

180

160

140
Number of Metros

120 estimated

100

80

60
40

20

0
1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Figure-2: Incremental Growth of Metro Systems worldwide over time

Source: Metro Bits, 2008

Commuter rail: Suburban or commuter rail tends to be part of a larger rail network that carries passengers
within urban areas or between urban areas and their suburbs, often at grade but separated from road traffic,
and differs from Metros and LRT in that the passenger cars generally are heavier, the average trip length
Jahangirnagar Planning Review ISSN 1728-4198
Vol. 6, June 2008, pp. 69-81, © Jahangirnagar University

Table-2: Performance And Cost Of Various MRT Systems

Caracas Kuala Bogota Kolkata
Bangkok Mexico City Tunis Recife Quito Porto Alegre Delhi
Example (line-4) Lumpur (TransMilenio, (Calcutta
(BTS) (line-B) (SMLT) (Linha sul) Busway Busways (Metro Phase-1)
(PUTRA) phase-1) Metro)
Commuter
Category Rail metro Rail metro Rail metro Light rail Light rail Busway Busway Busway Rail Metro Rail Metro
rail
Electric, steel AC Electric Electric, steel
Electric, steel Electric, rubber Electric, Electric, Electric, Articulate Diesel Electric, steel rail
Technology rail Duo- Diesel buses rail
rail tyre Driverless steel rail steel rail , buses
trolleybus
12.3 11.2 (+ext
Length (kms) 23.1 23.7 29 29.7 14.3 41 25 16.45 65.11
5.0)
20% tunnel
20% elevated 95% at grade At grade, At grade,
100% At grade, Mainly 80% at grade/
Vertical segregation 100% tunnel 100% elevated 55% at grade At grade 5% elevated Partial signal Mainly
elevated No signal priority underground elevated
25% tunnel priority segregated
Stop spacing (kms)
1.5 1.0 1.1 1.3 0.9 1.2 0.4 0.7 0.4 0.97 1.17
Capital cost (millions $) 1,110 1,700 970 1,450 435 166 110.3 213 25 365 2,100
Infrastructure/TA/
833 670 560 1,450 268 149 20.0 213 25 365 2,100
equipment (millions $)
Vehicles (millions $) 277 1,030 410 NA 167 18 80 NA NA NA NA
Capital cost/route-km
90.25 73.59 40.92 50.0 13.3 11.6 10.3 5.2 1.0 22.2 32.25
(millions $)
Initial (ultimate) vehicles
or trains/operation 20 (30) 20 (30) 13 (26) 30 NA 8 40 160 NA 7 15
hour/direction
Maximum passenger
capacity 32,400 50,000 39,300 30,000 12,000 36,000 15,000 35,000 20,000 18,000 75,000

Average operating speed

50 45 45 50 13/20 39 20 20 20 30 80
(km/h)
Revenue/operating cost
n.a 100 20 >100 115 NA 100 100 100 NA >100
ratio
Public Public
Private Public Private
Ownership Public Private (BOT) Public Public Public infrastructure, infrastructure, Public
(BOT) (BOT) (BOT)
private vehicles private vehicles
1995
Year completed 2004 1999 2000 1998 1998 2002 2000 1990 1984 2002
(ext 2000)
Note: NA means information is not available.
Sources: GTZ, 2005 ; World Bank, 2001; DMRC, 2008; MRK, 2008
Jahangirnagar Planning Review ISSN 1728-4198
Vol. 6, June 2008, pp. 69-81, © Jahangirnagar University

s are usually longer, and the operations are carried out over tracks that are part of the railroad system in the
area. Existing railway needs to be strengthened to introduce a new commuter rail as it often integrates with
the existing systems. These systems have to operate within the context of the wider network demands, and
are characterized by higher headways and longer station spacing as compared with both Metros and LRT.
Suburban railways in developing cities are usually radially oriented into the city center. Although even in
relatively well-served cities like Mumbai, Rio de Janeiro, Moscow, Buenos Aires and Johannesburg, they
carry less than 10% of trips, they can be important in supporting a transit-friendly city form and
maintaining a strong city center.

There are marked differences in the activities of MRT by regions. In Central and Eastern Europe activity is
focused on rehabilitating existing systems, upgrading the tram systems to LRT or heavy systems and
exceptionally, developing new metros. There is little systematic development of metro in Africa and the
Middle East. South Asia has metro operational only in India (Mumbai, Delhi and Kolkata). East and South-
East Asian cities have already extensive metros in operation and also in under planning in many cities. In
Latin America there are major busway programs and metro developments and suburban rail concessioning
too in some cases. BRT has increasingly become an attractive urban transit alternative in many Asian
developing cities especially in China and many other developing large cities of the world due to its cost-
effective and flexible implementation. But within a built-in environment of a city like Dhaka where the road
space is very limited, it is very difficult to introduce BRT system as it needs space sharing with existing
traffic. Rather it may be introduced in newly developed town like Purbachal.

Key Parameters for MRT Technology Selection

The selection of technology has long been the most controversial element in discussions of MRT. Costs,
speed, capacity, system image, environmental concern, local conditions, and personal preferences have
historically all played a role in the decision-making process. Although BRT systems show promises in terms
of cost effectiveness, rail solutions are till being implemented with increased frequency considering city
image, fuel efficiency and environmental concerns to carry large volume of passengers quickly and safely in
large cities. The divergent technology paths between developing and developed cities do not suggest one
solution is better or more appropriate than another. The choice of transit technology should be based on a
range of considerations with performance (speed, frequency/capacity, comfort, safety, system flexibility &
reliability) and cost being amongst the most important. Some of the major issues which greatly influence the
decision making on MRT technology selection are briefly discussed below:

Costs

Infrastructure cost is an important decision making factor for a proposed transit system in developing
countries. The infrastructure cost per kilometer of system in conjunction with the likely financing capacity
for the system will determine the overall size of the eventual transit network. According to SUTP (2008),
the infrastructure cost for urban heavy rail (metro) varies from approximately US$15-30 million/kilometer
for at-graded system, US$30-75 million/kilometer for elevated system, and US$60-180 million/kilometer
for underground system. The infrastructure investment for LRT falls between US$13 and 50
million/kilometer, depending on the system whether it will be at graded, elevated or underground. In case of
BRT, the initial investment cost is much lower and varies from US$ 0.5-15 million/ kilometer, depending on
the elements added to the system.
Jahangirnagar Planning Review 76

Although the BRT systems apparently show promises in terms of cost effectiveness, especially in terms of
initial investment cost, more importantly, the Table-4 shows that BRT is a poor long term investment;
whereas True (heavy-rail) Rapid Transit is the best long term investment.

Table-3: Comparison Of Long Term MRT Infrastructure Costsa

True Rapid Transit

LRT BRT
(Metro/Heavy Rail)
Average Roadbed cost per mile (Million
80 30 17
US$)
Refurbish cost per 50 years (Million US$) 0 40 68
Cost per mile over 50 years (Million
80 70 85
US$)
Cost per mile over 100 years (Million
80 120 170
US$)
th
a. Based on an average of 50% of the line on surface streets, which will be rebuilt once each 10 year
Source: CRTAWP, 2002

Heavy Rail-based transit’s infrastructure lasts 50 to100 years because it runs on an exclusive right-of-way
that is separated from all streets, highways and railroads. It is never affected by traffic accidents nor slowed
by heavy traffic. LRT infrastructure lasts 40 to 50 years because it runs on a combination of exclusive
rights-of way and surface streets, but its track on surface streets typically needs to be refurbished every ten
years. It can be delayed by accidents and heavy traffic. BRT infrastructure lasts 10 years because it runs on
surface streets and dedicated HOV highway lanes. BRT can be delayed by accidents and heavy traffic. True
Rapid Transit cars cost US$1.2 million each and last 50 years. LRT cars cost US$1 million each and can last
45 years. BRT buses cost US$700,000 each and last 10 years. Thus they need to be replaced 5 times in 50
years for a total cost of US$3.5 million.

On the other hand, the long-term financial sustainability of a public transport project is highly dependent
upon the on-going operating costs of the system. These costs can include vehicle amortization, labor, fuel,
maintenance, and spare parts. Figure-3 compares costs per passenger-mile of various modes. Rail transit
costs are usually less than combined road, vehicle and parking costs, particularly in large cities (Litman,
2006).

1.8
Cost per Passenger-Mile (US $)

1.6 Parking Costs

1.4
Roadway Costs
1.2
Vehicle Operation
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
Bus Heavy Rail Commuter Rail Light Rail Automobile- Auto-Medium Auto-Large
Small City City City

Figure-3: Average Operating Costs By Transit Modes

Source: VTPI, 2007; Litman, 2006
77 Future Mass Rapid Transit in Dhaka City: Options, Issues and Realities

Moreover, the physical structure of a city is very important to introduce a new transit system. As mentioned
earlier, BRT is not feasible where available road space is limited. Besides, it is an interim solution for
limited traffic; and if traffic demand is high, like Dhaka City, BRT is not a solution. Recently (in April
2008), BRT trial run fails miserably in Delhi. The dedicated bus lanes invited mixed reaction from the
public; with the car users complaining about having to spend more time on the road now than before and the
bus riders being annoyed with the bus-stands being displaced to the middle of the road. Poor design and lack
of coordination between different stake holders further worsened the situation. Whereas, the success of
Delhi Metro has triggered of a rush with many other cities, including Mumbai, Bangalore and Hyderabad
clamoring for similar heavy rail-based mass rapid transit systems.

Capacity and Speed

The capability and speed of a system to attract ridership is a prime decision-making determinant in selecting
a mass transit technology. The ability to move large numbers of passengers is a basic requirement for mass
rapid transit systems particularly in developing cities and in this context rail based metro systems show
unparallel performance. Urban heavy rail transit system can serve up to 81,000 passengers/hour/direction
(Hong Kong Subway) with maximum operational speed of 80 km/hour (Delhi Metro). With its own right-
of-way, LRT can carry up to 30,000 passengers/hour/direction (Kuala Lumpur). However, when compared
with heavy rail transit systems, the BRT system typically has slower operational speed and less passenger
capacity, varying from 10,000 (Ottawa Busway) to 35,000 (Bogota TransMilenio) passengers/hour/direction.
However, these capacities and speeds of the MRT systems greatly vary based on systems deigned and
technology used. Figure-4 shows the far higher rates of transit ridership and transit commute mode split in
"Large Rail" cities compare to ‘Bus Only’ cities (the dashed line at 100% indicates "Bus Only" city values).

600%

LargeRail
Relative to "Bus Only" Cities

500%
Small Rail
400%
Bus Only
300%

200%

100%

0%
Per Capita Ridership Commute Mode Split

Figure-4: Transit Ridership and Commute Mode Split Comparison

Source: VTPI, 2007; Litman, 2006

Comparative Benefits: Rail Vs. Bus Transit

A Comprehensive Evaluation of Rail Transit Benefits over Bus services conducted by Victoria Transport
Policy Institute (Litman, 2006) shows that large Rail cities are found to have significantly better transport
system performance (Figure-5). The study investigates that compared with Bus Only cities, Large Rail cities
have: 400% higher per capita transit ridership (589 versus 118 annual passenger-miles); 887% higher transit
Jahangirnagar Planning Review 78

commute mode split (13.4% versus 2.7%); 36% lower per capita traffic fatalities (7.5 versus 11.7 annual
deaths per 100,000 residents); 14% lower per capita consumer transportation expenditures ($448 average
annual savings); 19% smaller portion of household budgets devoted to transportation (12.0% versus 14.9%);
21% lower per capita motor vehicle mileage (1,958 fewer annual miles); 33% lower transit operating costs
per passenger-mile (42¢ versus 63¢); and58% higher transit service cost recovery (38% versus 24%).

180%
Relative to "Bus Only" Cities

Large Rail
160%
140% Small Rail
120% Bus Only
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
Traffic Transport Portion of Vehicle Vehicle Transit Transit Cost
Fatalities Expenditures Income On Ow nership Mileage Operating Recovery
Transport Costs

Figure-5: Transportation Performance Comparison

Source: VTPI, 2007; Litman, 2006

Moreover, rail transit can provide substantial energy conservation and emission reduction benefits (Figure-
6). Rail travel consumes about a fifth and a fourth of the energy per passenger-mile as automobiles and
buses travel, due to its high mechanical efficiency and load factors. Electric powered rail produce minimal
air and noise emissions. International comparisons indicate that per capita energy consumption declines with
increased heavy rail transit use.

6000
BTU Per Passenger-Mile

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

0
Bus Commuter Rail Heavy Rail Light rail Automobile

Figure-6 Transit Energy Consumption

Source: VTPI, 2007; Litman, 2006

Applicability of MRT in Dhaka City: Busway vs. Railway Prioritization

MRT alternatives are the mass transit systems that offer good service quality with fast operational speed,
making them a competitive mode of travel in the City. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. Such
mass rapid transit systems usually imply huge investments that will serve a city for a long time; therefore,
policy makers have to carefully select a proper alternative, or a combination of them, that best fit the
Jahangirnagar Planning Review 70
79 Future Mass Rapid Transit in Dhaka City: Options, Issues and Realities

conditions of the jurisdiction. BRT is the least-expensive form of MRT especially for short-term
investments and along small to medium demand corridors it can serve as an efficient urban transport system
(GAO, 2001). After its successful implementation in Latin American cities, BRT development initiatives
have got momentum and it has emerged as an economically self-reliant mass transit system with significant
potential for budget-constrained developing cities. But as affordability increases or environmental concerns
become critical; then LRT may perform a similar role. In the largest corridors of major cities, metros may be
required, especially when affordability can be justified.

Whether urban rail is essential or not for efficient transport in large developing cities depends on the city
and pattern of development itself. When high-density urban development expands widely but employment
remains centralized, bus and private car may not be able to provide efficient transport facilities to the mass
people and in this case urban rail with coordinated feeder services becomes predominantly important for
efficient method of transport to carry large volume of traffic (PADECO, 2000). The Japanese system of
urban transportation by rail, and its medium-range, high-speed railway network is a model for all to emulate.
Japan’s mass transit systems as well as railways are the envy of the world; fast, clean, frequent and punctual;
they are a daunting example to other nations of what can be achieved when government, business and
science co-operate for the benefit of all. Japan is one the few countries to maintain faith in use of a railway
network as an integral part of the mass transportation market. Tokyo’s extensive urban transport system,
among the most highly developed in the world, is largely characterized by an intensive use of rail systems. It
is likely that the population and employment growth in the Tokyo Metropolitan Region would not have been
achieved without the development of an extensive rail network. High-speed, frequent, and reliable rail
services have helped expand the area within commuting distance, while allowing employment to grow apace
in central Tokyo.

Singapore, Seoul, Malaysia and Taipei have also adopted rail-oriented strategies. Singapore is one of the
best examples of modern urban transport systems. In Bangkok, the progress of economic development and
increasing car ownership without an urban rail system resulted in one of the world’s congested and polluted
cities. Recently several attempts have been taken to build urban railway networks by adding various rail
systems to overdue public transport system so that the sufferings of the city dwellers can be mitigated in a
proper way. To enhance the rapid urbanization of Metro Manila, further LRT development is being
undertaken with the active participation of the private sector, and the role of LRT is expected to grow as the
system is expanded that began in operation in 1984 in a small scale. The most rapidly growing nations of
Asia, China and India, have actively initiated the urban rail systems, especially the metro, in many big cities
for its high potentialities to sustain the future growths of the cities.

A rapidly growing large city with limited supply of urban land and high density may require mass rail transit
to keep the city sustainable in the long run. A large city, like Dhaka, especially when it reaches a stage
where the concentration of travel demand can not be efficiently handled by the road-based system, the
development of an urban rail system becomes essential. From the experience of other mega cities, road
system alone cannot satisfy the need for transportation of such a large city. The existing infrastructure and
social condition have not enough provision to introduce bus only lanes and bus prioritization. Due to lack of
sufficient road capacity and limited scope for future expansion, bus services alone will not be able to meet
the future transportation demand. The population of greater Dhaka is expected to be 36.0 million by 2024
with estimated total 70 million person trips a day (STP, 2005). To carry this huge load and considering the
long-term investments benefits, heavy-rail based metro (subway) systems (like New Delhi) is necessary for
Dhaka City. But a number of difficulties (such as removing of soil, chances of flooding and thus electric
short-circuit and damage of equipment, etc.) are associated with this type of projects in addition to financial
constraints. Considering these difficulties and experiences from Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur may suggest
elevated rail system but this should be based on proper feasibility study. The secondary corridors may then
Jahangirnagar Planning Review 80

justify BRT systems, which also may feed the metro. BRT should not be considered as an alternative option
for heavy rail in a large city like Dhaka. Even the elevated motorways/busways will not solve the problems;
rather they will cater different types of traffic (like elite car owners). Moreover, the commuter or sub-urban
railway system also can easily be developed along existing corridors as an integrated part of the central
heavy-rail systems since the existing railroads connect many of the major parts of Dhaka.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Mass Rapid Transit contributes both to city efficiency and to the needs of mass people and plays an
important role in maintaining the viability and environmental quality of large cities, but it can also be risky
and can impose a severe burden on municipal finances. MRT planning initiatives involve multiple agencies
in a complex stakeholders’ setup based on rationality and equity. A specific proposal is unlikely to generate
any special or vested interest group to drag through the planning and adoption initiatives. An urban rail
system is an ecologically and economically efficient way of moving large volumes of passengers in big
cities. There are, however, many financial uncertainties associated with such capital-intensive projects that
must be addressed with careful planning, project management and effective operational management
policies. Although there is no one correct technology for the transit solution of a city; Dhaka city, with a
burden of overgrown population, stands an awful need to implement a heavy rail-based transit system which
should only be adopted within an integrated planning and financing structure ensuring system sustainability,
effective coordination of modes, and affordable provision for the poor.

Governments and city authorities should be realistic in selecting the transit technology, focusing their
considerations on long-term actual needs, implementation and financial issues. Public transport
professionals should take the window of opportunity offered by changes in government, the funding crisis
for large projects, rising oil prices, and international events concerning national pride. The interaction of
transportation with land use, and its sheer financial magnitude, requires its careful integration into the
planning of metropolitan structure and finance within a comprehensive long-term strategic city planning
process. Integration with other transport modes must be achieved in a sensitive manner that recognizes the
right of choice for the traveler. Non-motorized transport, especially walking and cycling, should be
prioritized in the planning process. Moreover, Dhaka has unique potential for waterways development due
to surrounding rivers and waterways in the metropolitan area. Besides, modes of public transport require
physical and fares coordination to keep them attractive and to protect the poor. Stakeholders need to agree
on a comprehensive transport strategy plan, within which the relationship among different modes (both
physical and financial) is understood. There must be strong political support and competent implementation
management, with arrangements put in place to facilitate coordination between multiple public agencies.

The public sector must set strategy, identify infrastructure projects in some detail (including horizontal and
vertical alignment, and station locations) and confirm the acceptability of environmental consequences,
tariffs, and any contingent changes to the existing transport system. There must be a comprehensive
financial plan to avoid the delays and cost overruns within which the costs of infrastructure and publicly
funded operations are foreseen and securely provided for. Especially when private finance is involved (even
in the form of BOT-Build, Operate and Transfer), MRT investments should be consistent with an approved
city structure plan; because opportunistic development on an ad hoc basis has usually proved to be
damaging to welfare, and ultimately costly to the budget. More importantly, detailed feasibility study is a
pre-requisite for such type of capital-intensive maga-projects. This feasibility study would be the
background study of the mass transit project, which will support the detail engineering and financial
feasibility of different mass transit options. It is believed that an ideal decision-making process in a logical
framework would definitely ensure the sustainability for our dear metropolis for the next generation.
81 Future Mass Rapid Transit in Dhaka City: Options, Issues and Realities

References

Armstrong-Wright, A. 1993. ‘Public Transport in Third World Cities, State of the Art Review 10’,
TRL,London.
BRTA. 2007. Bangladesh Road Transport Authority, Dhaka, 2007.
CRTAWP. 2002. ‘Colorado Rapid Transit Alliance White Paper’,
http://www.bcx.com/whitepapers/ApplesToApples.pdf. Retrieved on 14 February 2008.
DITS. 1993. ‘Greater Dhaka Metropolitan Area Integrated Transport Study’, PPK Consultants, Delcan
International and Development Design Consultant, Dhaka.
DMRC. 2008. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. http://www.delhimetrorail.com/. Retrieved on 23 May
2008.
Forbes. 2008. http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/26/pollution-baku-oil-biz-logistics-cx_tl_0226dirtycities.html.
Retrieved on 04 March 2008.
GAO. 2001. ‘Mass Transit: BRT Shows Promise’, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d01984.pdf. Retrieved on
12 February 2008.
GTZ. 2005. ‘Module 3a: Mass Transit Options. Sustainable Transport: A Sourcebook for Policy-makers in
Developing Cities’, http://www.itdp.org/documents/MTO.PDF. Retrieved on 02 February 2008
Litman, T. 2006. ‘Rail Transit in America: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Benefits’, http://www.apta.com/
research/info/online/documents/rail_transit.pdf. Retrieved on 10 February 2008.
Mackett, R.L. 1998. ‘The Impact of Urban Public Transport Systems: Will the Expectations be Met?’
Transport Research Record-A, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp231-245.
Metro Bits. 2008. http://www.mic-ro.com/metro/metrolist.html. Retrieved on 25 May 2008.
MRK. 2008. Metro Rail, Kolkata. http://www.kolmetro.com/features/salient.html. Retrieved on 22 May
2008.
PADECO. 2000. ‘Study on Urban Transport Development’, World Bank, Washington D.C., Public
Transportation,Vol.8, No.5.
STP. 2005. ‘Strategic Transport Plan for Dhaka’, Final Report, Louis Berger Group and Bangladesh
Consultants Ltd., Dhaka.
SUTP. 2008. Sustainable Urban Transport Project. http://www.sutp.org/. Retrieved on 22 May 2008.
UNFPA. 2001. ‘The State of World Population 2001’, http://www.unfpa.org/swp/2001/english/. Retrieved
on 10 November 2007.
VTPI. 2007. Online TDM Encyclopedia, Victoria Transport Policy Institute. http://www.vtpi.org/. Retrieved
on 20 February 2008.
World Bank. 2001. ‘Cities on the Move, Urban Transport Strategy Review’, World Bank, Washington DC.
World Bank. 2002. ‘Mass Rapid Transit in Developing Countries: Final Report’, Urban Transport Strategy
Review, World Bank, Washington, DC.