Indian cities should discourage cars completely, not just restrict them!

CHOKING CITIES

Delhi's odd-even experiment will be messy, contested and incremental, but restrictions on using cars are here to stay.

The odd-even rationing of roads in Delhi has got everyone talking about air pollution, public transport, carpooling and parking charges. It’s amusing that issues that until recently were confined to policy and academic circles have suddenly entered the public discourse. While this reaffirms the belief that an issue’s proximity to Delhi is directly proportionate to its media coverage, it doesn’t change the reality that the air pollution levels in the capital and other cities are indicative of a public health crisis. And it’s a crisis that has been created by placing our relentless appetite for private automobiles above human interest.

Automobiles dominate our cities and our minds. “Traffic congestion” is part of everyday lexicon and building of flyovers is widely used to claim development in cities. Like the mythological demon that kept gobbling, the demands for uninterrupted traffic flow, wider roads and more flyovers remain unsatisfied.

Private automobiles have become dominant thanks to cheaper loans, lenient taxation, demand for free parking spaces and the absence of effective road-pricing mechanisms. “Car seva” remains the unofficial motto of our urban policies, putting a dent in the city’s budget while officials get criticised for not supplying enough essential “infrastructure” for smooth and fast traffic movement. The large number of litigations against the odd-even car use restrictions in Delhi and the bitter criticism of the capital’s Bus Rapid Transit System illustrate how the incumbent automobile regime resists any form of usage restrictions or re-prioritisation.

Here, there and everywhere

The space occupied by automobiles – moving or parked – is viewed as inevitable and legitimate over other urban activities such as play areas for children or street trading. A car or a motorbike are not only “utility vehicles” but are fast becoming personalised objects of cultural consumption. Popular media and automobile advertisements continue to portray automobiles as symbols of greater freedom and higher social status.

Ownership of an automobile brings a sense of entitlement for consuming increasingly more road space. We have fallaciously linked automobiles and the upgrade from a motorbike to a car as the only possible curve of social and economic progress. Similarly, a spurt in the private automobile sector is viewed as a pathway for economic growth. The automobile regime encompasses political, economic, social and cultural vested interests developed around the relentless consumption of automobile use.

The dominance of automobiles also affects other transport modes and access to public spaces. As automobiles appropriate more and more space, the use and quality of public transport and the share of walking and cycling in commuting declines. Even so, walking and cycling constitute 40% share in urban travel, according to the latest census.

Pedestrians and cyclists scavenge for road space. Jaywalking is not pleasant in most cities. Automobile-free areas, where one can walk freely, children can play carelessly or where the elderly can relax, are rare, gated, exclusive, and at times expensive.

Housing colonies, institutions, streets are infested with parked automobiles, each of them giving up on other activities to accommodate the vehicles. Soon, Gurgaon-like suburbs proliferating in cities around India will lock their residents into an automobile-centric culture, just like the residents of the low-density sprawling suburbs of the North American cities.

We live in cities made for automobiles, honking is an inevitable part of our urban soundscapes, and breathing the foul air emanating from automobiles completes our urban lives. While private automobiles are not solely responsible for air pollution, the dominance of the automobile regime severely affects the quality of urban life.

Long-term projections show that by 2050, the majority of urban travellers in India will depend on public transport of various forms including the para-transits, walking and cycling, carpools or car share if they become popular.

Future course

Despite high vehicle ownership, cities in industrialised countries have reversed their public policies and have started restricting the use of automobiles in one way or the other.

So how will the restrictions on automobile consumption become a political priority in India? Do we have political constituencies around promoting public transport today? Do people demand better buses – GPS-enabled, smart card-operated, etc. – instead of cheaper fuel for their private vehicles? Shouldn’t we have a Pradhan Mantri Rashtriya Shahari Footpath Yojana? Will cycling to work be incentivised in the Smart Cities Mission?

There is a silver lining. The problem of automobile dominance in the city affects the elite class, and that’s why there is such a hue and cry at the moment. Delhi’s odd-even car use restrictions have initiated politics of differential mobility on a large scale – a little niche to discuss alternative ways of moving around the city, a first step to dismantling the idea that car ownership gives you god-given rights to the road space.

The policy may not be completely rational and the government might not have the wherewithal to fully implement it initially. But let’s remember that public interventions in India are messy, contested and incremental.

The odd-even formula from Delhi will slowly get more people on board to understand that restrictions on the use of cars are here to stay. It will grow into two-wheeler restrictions, carpooling and, hopefully, better public transport integration.

As long as the Delhi government is keen to stay the course, these restrictions will become a reality in the capital and hopefully in many other Indian cities as well.

Published on 4th January, 2016. URL: http://scroll.in/article/801229/indian-cities-should-discourage-cars-completely-not-jut-restrict-them 

Two bus systems roll under one roof, but not talking to each other!

There are two bus systems in Ahmedabad – one, the six-year-old bus rapid transit system aka ‘Janmarg’ and two, the six-decades-old AMTS run bus services popularly known as ‘red bus’. Both of these bus systems belong to the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation but they have different models of operations. AMTS is operated in a conventional municipal way by shared power between officials and politicians whereas a special purpose company owned by the government operates the BRTS. Both the systems operate parallel to each other – BRTS gets to use the special dedicated corridor where as the AMTS buses runs in the mixed traffic. AMTS carries about 8 lakhs passengers every day whereas BRTS carries about 1.3 lakhs. Both bus systems run competing with each other. They have separate management, different ticketing, different fare model, different bus stops and different way of reaching out to customers.

Cities around the world, which have efficient transport systems, work very hard at integrating various public transport modes rather than keeping them segregated. Integration of public transport modes means traveling across different public transport modes through one ticket, platform sharing, revenue sharing and bringing every public mode into one brand which people can identify with easily. More importantly, public transport integration is good for business! When two (public transit) companies start sharing the customers, their business gets multiplied. ‘Transport for London’ is one brand identity and it actively integrates various modes of transport – buses and express buses, light rail (DLR), heavy rail (metro or underground), suburban rail and even the boat service across Thames. One can travel across these modes using one ticket or smart card. Each system actively shares information about other systems and make the life of the public transit users comfortable. No wonder London’s transport system is one of the best in the world!

It is often difficult to get two different government agencies to talk to each other but when two entities are under one roof, integration should be easy. But it seems that it is not the case in Ahmedabad. Since the inception of the BRTS, an unnecessary schism is developed between two bus systems. BRTS was projected as an exclusive service whereas AMTS has suffered because of the lack of innovations, years of neglect and accumulation of vested interests. However, a slow process of ‘talking to each other’ seems to have started between AMTS and BRTS. Apparently,now 46 AMTS buses are going to be using about 4 BRTS corridors. But the use of the BRTS corridors by the AMTS buses is not the most useful way of integrating the two systems.

There is a need for a comprehensive strategy of integration between two bus systems in Ahmedabad. Both require continuing investments in planning, operations and maintenance. It is very difficult for the public transport to make profits but if a ‘smart’ business plan is shared between two systems then both can benefit from each other. This essentially requires ‘taking to each other’. And the biggest challenge in our cities is to get people-government-authorities to talk to each other. Keep talking to each other is the only way for public systems to be strengthened, well coordinated and integrated. Let us hope that we will soon see integrated ticketing, sharing of platforms, sharing of revenue and complimentary operations between these two ‘not talking’ bus systems in Ahmedabad.

(14th September, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/story.aspx?id=71358&boxid=3225&ed_date=2015-09-14&ed_code=1310009&ed_page=5

Why free parking is entitlement but street vending is encroachment?

You must have seen people who push their way through the queues at the airport, people who honk indiscriminately at the moving vehicles in front, people who throw garbage out of moving cars, people who feel proud of making noise at the restaurants. These people have a great sense of entitlements and they have assumed that they deserve everything they can grab. They feel deeply threatened when their sense of entitlement is challenged. These are the people, who fight for parking spots and believe that it is the obligation of the city to provide space for their car wherever they need.

Parking spots are weirdly linked with the vehicle owner’s ego and the size of the ego is directly proportional to the size of the vehicle they drive. Many vehicles owners think, it is their birth right to get free parking every where. Free parking is usually haphazard parking, which not only obstructs the pedestrian movement but the moving vehicles on the streets. Most of the roads in our cities operate on half their capacity andparked vehicles occupy the other half. We keep making multi-storied parking buildings, which remain empty, but the parking on the streets is chaos.

Every large city in Gujarat and elsewhere requires a policy of paid parking on all their major roads. The international experience shows that the paid parking policies have magical effect of removing unnecessary parking from the streets. This goes a long way in opening up the pedestrian paths and smoothening the traffic flow. But to convert the free parking lots in all major roads into the paid parking lots is a very unpopular move. Because many car owners think that free parking is their entitlement that the government is supposed to provide. The government officials who move around in official vehicles also feel that it is too harsh to charge for parking. This mindset needs to change.

Vehicular parking is similar to street vending as both occupy public spaces like roads for private activities. Arguably, both are economic generating activities and add to the vibrancy of the city. Yet both are treated entirely differently in popular perceptions and thus, by the city government. When word ‘encroachments’ is used generally for the street vendors and not for the freely parked vehicles. The municipal raids to clear ‘encroachments’ do not touch the parked vehicles. Vendors are often under threats by the police and they are pushed around at different occasions. But vehicles can be parked freely anywhere and everywhere. Even the traffic police is selective about the kind of vehicles they catch to fine.

I am optimistic about paid parking policy to become a reality soon. The ever-increasing vehicles on the roads are going to force us to think of new ways of dealing with the ‘parking problem’. In a welcome move, the Ahmedabad’s Municipal Corporation and the Traffic Police have decided to have the paid parking lots around the Sarkhej-Gandhinagar highway. The CG road has had paid parking lots for two decades now but there is lot of unpaid parking in the side lanes. If our cities want to save their streets from being converted into permanent parking lots then the paid parking needs to be extended to its all major roads.

(17th August, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/story.aspx?id=70207&boxid=1215&ed_date=2015-08-17&ed_code=1310009&ed_page=5

Paving paradise and putting up a parking lot? It should cost!

“You don’t know what you’ve got till it’s gone, they pave paradise and put up a parking lot,” – these are a few words of a song ‘Big Yellow Taxi’ by American singer Joni Mitchell. This song summarises the problems created by the relentless parking in our cities. Best of public spaces or common spaces in residential areas are now parking lots. Can you imagine the municipal market at the CG road without parked vehicles? Probably, you will see some beautiful fountains and children playing around a nice plaza. Can you imagine alternative use of spaces in your residential area if it was not fully covered with parking? Probably, children would have lot many spaces to play around without the fear of vehicles and the elderly people would have lot many spaces to ‘hang around’.

The car ownership in India is still very low compared to many other developing countries and with increasing income, more and more families are going to buy cars. The families who already have cars will buy bigger cars. The city will have to make provision for at least two parking spaces per car – one at home and one near the workplace or the shopping place, which will be about 25 square metres per car. This is a huge burden on urban infrastructure to provide so much of floor space for the storage of the vehicles. Besides, one of these parking spaces is always going to remain empty. Parking space is a dead space – it cannot be used for anything else. So who should be investing in the parking infrastructure or whose responsibility is it to provide parking for the vehicles in a city?

Vehicles are private goods. When someone parks a car on a public road, it is an act of ‘privatising the public space’. When the government provides parking for free, they are subsidising the storage of private goods. Why should the government subsidise the storage of private goods? Yet some vehicle owners expect the provision of free parking anywhere and everywhere. To satisfy this demand of the vehicle owners, the government typically supplies multi-storey parking lots.

People who understand parking economics do not think of the multi-storey parking lots as the right solution. Let’s take for example the parking lot near Kankaria Lake, which used crores of rupees from the public exchequer. This multi-storey parking lot remains mostly vacant even in the peak hours while there is parking chaos on the road outside. Why should someone park inside this multi-storey parking lot when they can park on the road for free? The only way to get vehicle owners to park inside the multi-storey parking lots is to keep the parking charges on the streets higher than the parking lots.

It is imperative to take parking charges from every parked vehicle on all major roads for the act of ‘privatising the public space’. The international experience shows that the vehicles ‘disappear’ from roads when the parking is charged and when parking is free, more and more people are encouraged to take the vehicles out even for short trips. Paid parking would lead to better street design and management. If parking is charged on all major roads on the city, there will be a compulsion to provide designated parking lots, the parking chaos will be curtailed and more spaces will open up for the pedestrians.

(3rd August, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)

http://epaper.dnaindia.com/story.aspx?id=69629&boxid=4347&ed_date=2015-08-03&ed_code=1310009&ed_page=5

A single public transport project cannot solve all traffic problems!

There are optimists and then there are daydreaming optimists. For daydreaming optimists, an announcement of a project is good enough to imagine that all problems will be solved. They would really believe that metro-based mass transit system would solve major traffic problems in the city. Single project solutions are not sustainable solutions for the long run. This is not to say that metro project in Ahmedabad does not have any merits. But the field of urban planning and traffic problems need a multi-starrer cast and one hero is never good enough.

Rail-based transport systems are sturdy and long lasting. They can expand their passenger carrying capacities easily and they move at great speed. They are probably the best system in moving people across cities. When it comes to intra-city travel, they have certain limitations. Metro rail will have a limited geographical spread and secondly, it is the most expensive public transport system. Which city can afford a capital cost of Rs200 crores per kilometer and then equally high operations costs in the system’s lifetime? Given the cost and infrastructure inputs, the metro rail project will only be feasible on a few corridors in a city and it will never have a good geographical spread as other systems. Which means it will have expensive tickets and it will be prohibitive to use for the low-income groups. The low-income groups are the captive public transport users and without their patronage, the metro system cannot prosper. Will the metro project try to attract the dedicated low-income commuters?

Even in cities like Delhi, where the metro have a good coverage of 190 kms or more, buses carry many more passengers than the metro. This is also true for London where the metro network is about 450 kms but the buses carry more passengers. The regular buses are always going to cover the cities well and their tickets are going to be cheaper. Buses are both competitor and complimentary services to the metro. The metro system will work well on the high-capacity segments and it will have to be integrated with the bus-based system to get benefits of the other segments. Smart cities recognise this and create public transport system that is seamlessly integrated. In London, you can use one smart card to access buses, metro, light rail, suburban rail, ferries and taxies. In Ahmedabad, we have two bus services belonging to one municipal corporation struggling to share platforms, ticketing and routes. The exclusivity of the BRTS and apathy in AMTS is hurting the passengers the most. As a result, there are more and more people encouraged to use private vehicles.

If the proposed metro project is going to bring yet another kind of exclusivity then not only the passengers will suffer but also the system will suffer due to low ridership. Seamless transfers and integration of public transport systems multiplies the benefits for everyone. There is a great opportunity to make Vasna, Paldi, Town hall junction, Wadaj and RTO junction as multi-modal transport hubs interlinking the regional bus, AMTS, BRTS and the proposed metro along with the auto rickshaws and taxis. From building one successful project, our cities will have to transit to make one successful system. Integrating projects and developing a system requires a great political and administrative acumen. A city, where success is measured based on systems and not based on projects, is a smart city.

(27th July, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)

Will the next-gen kids ever experience the fun of cycling on city streets?

It has become rare to find films depicting its main protagonist as an everyday cyclist. In the 1940s-50s films, cyclists were depicted as working class heroes who would cycle to work. Here, the cycle would become a symbol of hard work and freedom in an industrialising society. The films of the 1960s and 1970s showed cycling as both a recreational and a group activity, where the actor on a cycle used to go for a ‘picnic’ with his or her friends, singing and dancing. This changed drastically in the 1980s and 1990s when cycling started disappearing from the movies. Since then, cycles have only appeared in nostalgic or atypical sequences, but not as a part of life or as an everyday object. Indian cities have witnessed consistent decline of cycling from everyday life, popular culture and urban landscapes.

Films not only represent collective social experiences but also construct aspirations and imaginations of lifestyles. These observations prompt a gloomy question – is cycling a part of everyday urban life anymore? Is there space in our cities for cycling without getting hurt? Will the children today ever know the fun of aimless wandering - cycling and running around in the streets? Any possibilities of cycling on our motorised traffic-packed streets make a lot of people nervous today. I am not sure how genuine this fear of getting out on a cycle, is but a lot of people complain of safety issues, lack of infrastructure and weather conditions. In spite of all odds, there are lakhs of people who cycle to their destinations in our cities. Many school children still cycle to school for some years. Both of these groups have their own vulnerabilities of being victims in road crashes.

On the other hand, many countries around the world have seen a revival of cycling – London is investing about 1 billion pounds in cycling, that is after spending 500 millions in a public bike sharing scheme known as ‘Boris Bikes’. About 200 European cities, 50 South American cities and about 25 Asian cities have definitive plans for cycling infrastructure and promotion, including the public bike sharing schemes. Weather conditions are not very pleasant in London and in many other European cities, yet the numbers of cyclists keep going up and they continue to build infrastructure. Why in the world are these cities investing in cycling in the 21st century? Because they are worried about climate change and they are fighting the relentless air pollution. Besides, cycling-friendly cities are people-friendly, beautiful cities - Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Paris, Berlin, Dublin, Antwerp, Buenos Aires and many more. 

We have lakhs of cyclists in our cities but we still need to promote the culture of cycling and fight the social stigma of it being a ‘poor man’s vehicle’. A cycle is perfect for manageable distances and it is surely a healthier and environment-friendly mode of transport unlike any other mode. Cycles takes up less space while moving and parking. You can begin cycling just one day in a week. One message concluded it all for me – ‘cycle burns fat and saves money, car burns money and makes you fat!’ There are lots of local heroes who are putting in great efforts for reviving cycling in cities of Gujarat - more about them next week!

 (13th July, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)

You are not stuck in traffic, you are ‘the traffic’ that you resent so much!

A bus full of people reduces about 50-80 vehicles from roads. A train coach will reduce about 100 vehicles if it reaches where the need is. 

"A developed country is not where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation."

You are not stuck in traffic, you ARE the traffic!’ – Originally a slogan from Copenhagen to promote sustainable means of transport has become a timely reminder for many city planners and administrators in the 21st Century. It is quite self-sympathising and self-deluding to believe that ‘I am stuck in traffic’ – as if there is a larger conspiracy to do so. Smart motorists realise that they are also contributor to the problem of traffic and they cannot get away by putting the blame on others for driving just like them. Recently I have been guilty of adding one more car in the city by buying one. The more I drive the car, the more I realise how I am contributing to the problem.

When you are a car driver, you would like wider roads and less traffic coming your way. Wider roads, free parking and smoother functioning of traffic coupled with lack of efficient public transport compel a lot of people to take up driving. Yet we have a very low car ownership in the country compared to many industrialised countries. For example, the US have about 750 cars per thousand people and we have not even reached about 100 motor vehicles per thousand people. In short, motor vehicles will be growing at unprecedented rates and we will have to learn to deal with this problem like other countries.

Cities around the world are realising that unlimited supply of wider roads and flyovers is not possible. These conventional solutions of keep building ‘roads over roads’ are not economically or environmentally sustainable. By building a maze of flyovers and by allowing relentless traffic, Delhi has attracted the worst air pollution, unsafe roads and never-ending traffic. Besides, who likes to live in a city, which has a jumble of flyovers on every junction but hardly any sight of greens! Even car drivers are not happy with these solutions because they neither get wide roads nor smoothly operated traffic. As new owners add more and more vehicles, the once-upon-a-time nice roads to drive on get congested.

Many cities have realised that they need to make ‘life-style changes’ to solve the problem of their clogged arteries and some by-passes here and they will not help in the long run. As Petro Gustavo - the mayor of Bogota famously said, “A developed country is not where the poor have cars. It’s where the rich use public transportation.” Promoting public transport and making it so efficient and affordable that a majority uses it is a challenge worth taking up.

A bus full of people reduces about 50-80 vehicles from the roads. A metro train coach will reduce about 100 vehicles provided it reaches where the need is. Many vehicle drivers will not mind walking short distances or taking public transport provided there are better facilities. Cities in Gujarat have surely made a good beginning in these directions compared to many other Indian cities but they will need to do much more. Over the last few years, the awareness amongst the citizens about the benefits of public transport is growing. This needs to be now backed up with the adequate investments, long-term plans and efficient implementation. Good governance gives us possibilities of being a solution to the problem and not only the contributors. Hope, we get our due!

(15th June, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)

big cars, bigger egos and culture of rule-breaking kills people on the roads!

We are curiously watching the case of Salman Khan’s drunken driving and roadside killing. As of now, Salman Khan, balancing between public sympathy and hatred, is delaying the process of justice with a hope that he might evade it completely. As a reputed judge and author Tom Bingham said, the rule of law unfortunately is ‘hooray for my side’ for most of the people. This partisanship is often used to put pressure on the judiciary. Besides the larger issue of the prevalence of the rule of law, Salman Khan is surely a bad role model for the young motor vehicle drivers. 

Salman Khan is not the only bad role model in young people’s life. Youngsters learn most of their behaviour traits from their parents. How about parents (on motorbikes and cars) dropping kids to school by driving on the wrong side of the road? Lot of people believe that we should teach the kids traffic discipline from their childhood - catch them young! Kids learn more looking at the conduct of their parents then what they learn in the children's traffic parks. How do we expect the kids to follow traffic rules when there is a prevailing culture of casual rule breaking for the sake of little convenience? Unfortunately, this culture of casual rule breaking is considered social smartness in most cases and is further encouraged.

  

The wrongful behaviour on part of the motor vehicle drivers also emerge from their imagination of seeing themselves as 'victims' - 'what do I do when there is no provision for me!' or ‘give me more space, I am more important than others!’ When someone buys an expensive, big vehicle the feeling of victimhood doubles up - as if buying an expensive vehicle is a license to ask for more road space, free parking space and honking unnecessarily. More powerful people with their more powerful vehicles have a great sense of entitlement. When this self-assumed entitlement for unlimited road space is denied, they see themselves as victim of relentless traffic and not as equal participants in adding to the chaos. The combination of the culture of casual rule breaking and notion of ‘victimhood’ results in road rage and wrongful traffic behaviour. 

  

The statistics from the National Crime Records Bureau shows us that the bigger vehicles are responsible for larger number of road fatalities. Trucks or SUVs going at a high speed will kill more people than an auto rickshaw. With bigger vehicle comes bigger responsibility of saving other people’s life. 1.25 lakh Indians die in road traffic related crashes every year. If we are serious about reducing the road fatalities then we will not only have to make the physical infrastructure of our streets safer but also target some of these social issues - bad role models, sense of entitlement/victimhood amongst the privileged drivers and the culture of casual rule breaking. 

(11th May, 2015: DNA Ahmedabad edition, Cities Supplement, Page 5)

બીઆરટીએસથી રસ્તા સાંકડા થાય કે વધતા ટ્રાફિકથી?

આજકાલ ગુજરાતી-અંગ્રેજી દૈનિકોમાં વારંવાર વાંચવા મળે છે કે અમદાવાદના બીઆરટીએસ ઉર્ફ જનમાર્ગનાં લીધે શહેરના રસ્તા સાંકડા થઇ ગયા છે, ટ્રાફિકની પારાવાર સમસ્યા વકરી છે, અણઘડ આયોજન છે, બીઆરટીએસનો વિચાર જ ખોટો છે વગેરે વગેરે. શરૂઆતમાં સરકારી વિકાસની વ્યાખ્યામાં વ્યવસ્થિત બેસી જતો બીઆરટીએસનો પ્રોજેક્ટ હવે ટ્રાફિકના દૈત્યને નાથવામાં વિફળ રહ્યો હોઈ ચર્ચાને એરણે ચઢ્યો છે. ચાલો, તાર્કિક રીતે તપાસીએ કે 'રસ્તા સાંકડા થવા' સિન્ડ્રોમ પાછળ ક્યાં જનીનતત્વો જવાબદાર છે. જો કે એવો કોઈ દાવો નથી કે છાપામાં આવતાં સમાચારો અને અભિપ્રાયો તાર્કિક હોતા નથી પણ એવો કોઈ આગ્રહ ય નથી કે જે કાંઈ છપાય બધું જ સાત્વિક હોય છે. 

બીઆરટીએસ સ્ટેશન, અમદાવાદ. ફોટો: Meanest Indian - Janmarg album on flickr

બીઆરટીએસનો મૂળ વિચાર એવી રીતે ઉદભવેલો કે ખાનગી વાહનોને અમર્યાદિત જગ્યા આપવાને બદલે બસ આધારિત જાહેર પરિવહનને રસ્તા પર જ પ્રાથમિકતા આપવામાં આવે તો એકંદરે આખા શહેરને લાંબા ગાળાનો ફાયદો થાય છે. કારણકે ખાનગી ટ્રાફિકની જગ્યા માટેની ભૂખ ક્યારેય શમતી નથી. ગમે તેટલી જગ્યા આપો પણ વાહનોની કતારો પૂરી થતી નથી. ઝડપથી જતાં વાહનોને વધુ જગ્યા જોઈએ, જ્યારે ધીમી ગતિએ જતાં વાહનોને ઓછી જગ્યા જોઈએ. રસ્તા પર વધુ જગ્યા હોય તો ઓછી સંખ્યાના વાહનો ઝડપ કરીને તે જગ્યા પૂરી લે છે અને ઓછી જગ્યા હોય તો વધુ સંખ્યામાં વાહનો ધીમી ગતિએ આગળ વધે છે. જ્યાં સુધી વાહનો ધીમી પણ મક્કમ ગતિએ આગળ વધતા હોય તો તે વાંધાજનક સ્થિતિ નથી પણ પહોળા અને વધુ પહોળા રસ્તાઓ ટૂંક જ સમયમાં તેજ ગતિથી જતા વાહનોથી ભરાઈ જાય છે. આ આધુનિક ટ્રાન્સપોર્ટેશન પ્લાનિંગની સાદી-સીધી સમજણ છે. 

બીજું, વાહનો માટે રસ્તાની પહોળાઈ અને જગ્યા વધારતા જ રહેવા માટે રસ્તા ઉપર રસ્તા (ફ્લાયઓવર) બનાવવા પડે. રસ્તા ઉપર રસ્તા બનાવ્યા બાદ પણ સમસ્યાનો હાલ આવતો નથી કારણકે હવે ઉપર અને નીચેના માળે ફરી એ જ ટ્રાફિકના ભરાવાનાં પ્રશ્નો ઉભા થાય છે. રસ્તા ઉપર રસ્તા બનાવતા રહેવાનો ઉપાય બહુ જ મોંઘો છે અને તે થોડા સમય માટે, અમુક લોકોને જ રાહત આપે છે. ફ્લાયઓવર બનાવવા એ બાય-પાસ સર્જરી જેવું છે, જેમાં ખર્ચ વધુ હોય છે અને ઉપાય ટૂંકા ગાળાનો થાય છે. લાંબા ગાળાનો ઉપાય જેમ હૃદયની બાબતમાં નિયમિત કસરત અને પૌષ્ટિક ખોરાક છે તેમ વાહનવ્યવહારની બાબતમાં તે ઉપાય છે કે જાહેર પરિવહનનો મહિમા કરવો, તેની સર્વિસ સુધારવી અને તેને પ્રાથમિકતા આપવી. આવા લાઈફસ્ટાઈલને લગતાં પરિવર્તનો કર્યા સિવાય, શોર્ટકટથી કે બાય-પાસથી દુનિયાના કોઈ પણ દેશે કે કોઈ પણ શહેરે વાહનવ્યવહારના પ્રશ્નોનો હલ લાવ્યો નથી. બીઆરટીએસ એ આવો જ ઉપાય છે કે જેમાં જાહેર બસને પ્રાથમિકતા મળે, સરળ રીતે સ્ટેશનથી બસમાં ચઢી શકાય, ટીકીટ લેવામાં સહેલાઇ આવે અને દર અમુક મીનીટે એક-બે દિશામાં જતી બસો મળી રહે. ટૂંકમાં, આ ટ્રાફિકમાં અટવાતી જાહેર બસોને એક અલગ કોરીડોર આપીને પ્રાથમિકતા આપવાની વાત છે જેથી આ જાહેર સુવિધાઓનો ઉપયોગ કરનારાંને પેટ્રોલ-ડીઝલના ધુમાડા ઓછા કાઢ્યાનો શિરપાવ બીજા વાહનો જેટલી જ ઝડપે, સમયસર પહોંચવાથી મળી શકે! 

એક બીઆરટીએસ કે એએમટીએસની બસ શહેરના રસ્તાઓ પરથી એંસીથી સો વાહન ઓછા કરે છે. આ બસ ન હોત તો શહેરમાં એંસી કે સો વાહનો ધુમાડા કાઢતા ફરતા હોત. તેથી ખાનગી વાહનના અઠંગ બંધાણીઓએ જાહેર બસોમાં ફરતાં મુસાફરોનું જાહેર સન્માન કે અભિવાદન કરવું જોઈએ. અમદાવાદ શહેરમાં દસેક લાખ મુસાફરીઓ બસ દ્વારા થાય છે અને બીજી ચાલીસ લાખ મુસાફરીઓ ખાનગી વાહનોમાં થાય છે. જો બસ સેવા બંધ થાય તો શહેરનો ટ્રાફિક રાતોરાત વીસેક ટકા વધી જાય. અત્યારે જો ટ્રાફિકનો આટલો કકળાટ ચાલે છે તો વીસેક ટકા વધારામાં શું થઇ શકે, તેની કલ્પના જ કરવી રહે. બીજું કે, ભવિષ્યના શહેરોમાં જાહેર પરિવહનનો કોઈ વિકલ્પ જ નથી. ભારતમાં હજુ પણ વ્યક્તિદીઠ વાહનોની સંખ્યા દુનિયાભરની સરખામણીમાં સાવ ઓછી છે. નોર્થ અમેરિકામાં દર હજારની વસ્તીએ સાતસો પચાસ વાહનો છે તો યુરોપમાં દર હજારે પાંચસો-છસ્સો વાહનો છે. ભારતના શહેરોમાં દર હજારે સો-દોઢસો વાહનો જ હજી સુધી નોંધાયા છે. વર્ષ 2050 સુધીમાં આ આંકડો દર હજારે અઢીસો-ત્રણસો વાહનોની સંખ્યા પાર કરે ત્યારનો શહેરનો ટ્રાફિક કલ્પી શકો છો? જેમ ઘરદીઠ બોરવેલએ પાણી પુરવઠાનો લાંબાગાળાનો, ટકાઉ ઉપાય નથી અને શહેરમાં પાણીપુરવઠાની કેન્દ્રીય, જાહેર વ્યવસ્થા હોવી જ જોઈએ. તેવી જ રીતે દુનિયાના સફળ શહેરોમાં મજબૂત, ટકાઉ અને વાપરતાં ગમે તેવી જાહેર પરિવહનની વ્યવસ્થા હોય છે. શહેરો આખરે સહિયારી સુવિધાઓ અને સહિયારા પ્રયાસોથી જ બને છે.

ચાલો, હવે બીજો પ્રશ્ન તપાસીએ કે બીઆરટીએસ જ કેમ અને મેટ્રો રેઇલ કેમ નહિ? મેટ્રો રેઇલને સમગ્ર શહેરમાં ફેલાવો ધરાવતી કરવા માટે લાંબુ-ચોડું નેટવર્ક જોઈએ. એક-બે મેટ્રો કોરીડોરથી ટ્રાફિકની સમસ્યાનો હલ આવતો નથી. મેટ્રો રેલના નેટવર્ક માટે દર કિલોમીટર દીઠ દોઢસોથી બસ્સો કરોડનો ખર્ચ કરવો પડે, જયારે બીઆરટીએસના નેટવર્કનો વધુમાં વધુ ખર્ચ કિમી દીઠ દસ કરોડ થાય છે. વળી મેટ્રોમાં એકવારનો કેપિટલ ખર્ચ કર્યા બાદ રોજબરોજના ચાલન-સંચાલનનો ખર્ચ પણ ઘણો વધુ હોય છે. એટલે કે એકવાર દેવું કરીને મર્સિડીઝ ખરીદો પણ પછી તેને રોજે ચલાવવા માટે પેટ્રોલનો ખર્ચ કેવી રીતે કાઢશો? એટલે મેટ્રો રેઇલ એ ઓછો વ્યાપ્ત ધરાવતી મોંઘી સુવિધા છે. હકીકત એ છે કે કોઈ એક પ્રકારની પરિવહન સીસ્ટમથી શહેરના ટ્રાફિકના બધા જ પ્રશ્નો હલ આવતો નથી. બીઆરટીએસ હોય કે પછી સાદી બસ, તેના જેટલો ફેલાવો કોઈ મોંઘી સીસ્ટમ ધરાવી શકતી નથી એટલે મેટ્રો ભલે બે-ત્રણ કોરીડોર પર બને પણ સીધી-સાદી બસનો કોઈ વિકલ્પ નથી. લંડન જેવા શહેરમાં અન્ડરગ્રાઉન્ડ મેટ્રોનું માયાજાળ ચારસો કિમી હોવા છતાં શહેરની ચાલીસ ટકા મુસાફરીઓ સાદી બસમાં થાય છે.  મુંબઈમાં પણ સબર્બન ટ્રેઇનોનું નેટવર્ક હોવા છતાં શહેરી મુસાફરીઓનો ત્રીજો ભાગ બેસ્ટની બસો ધરાવે છે. શહેરી બસનો કોઈ વિકલ્પ નથી. જરૂરત છે બસની સુવિધાઓ રેઇલ અને બીજી સેવાઓ જોડે વ્યવસ્થિત રીતે સાંકળવાની. 

અમદાવાદનાં લગભગ દરેક બીઆરટીએસ ધરાવતાં રસ્તાઓ પર વિવિધ ટ્રાફિક માટે એક તરફની દિશામાં કમસેકમ બે લેન રાખવામાં આવી છે. આજ બે લેનમાં જ્યારે ટ્રાફિક ઓછો હતો ત્યારે તે રૂપાળી લાગતી હતી. હવે ટ્રાફિક વધવાથી નાની પડતી લાગે છે. મજાની વાત એ છે કે બીઆરટીએસના રસ્તા પર ટ્રાફિકની ફરિયાદ કરનારાઓને શહેરમાં વધતો જતો ટ્રાફિક અને તેમાં પોતાની સરખી હિસ્સેદારી કે જવાબદારી દેખાતી નથી પણ વાંક બીઆરટીએસનો કાઢવામાં આવે છે. રસ્તા સાંકડા રોજબરોજ વધતા વાહનોના લીધે થાય છે, બીઆરટીએસના લીધે નહિ. વળી, આડેધડ પાર્કિંગને લીધે પણ રસ્તા પરની જગ્યાઓ વ્યવસ્થિત રીતે વપરાતી નથી. રસ્તાને સાંકડા બનાવતાં બંને મુદ્દા ઝડપથી વધતા ખાનગી વાહનોની સંખ્યાને લગતા છે. અમદાવાદમાં છેલ્લા દસ વર્ષમાં જો વસ્તી લગભગ બમણી થઇ હોય તો વાહનોની સંખ્યા સાત-આઠ ગણી ઝડપે વધી છે. વ્યક્તિદીઠ આવકમાં વધારા અને વધતી જતાં શહેરના ફેલાવના લીધે ટ્રાફિકનું ઔધ્યોગીકરણ થયું છે. દુનિયાના દરેક વિકસિત દેશોએ આ પ્રકારનું મોટરીકરણ અનુભવ્યું છે અને આખરે, વાહનોને શહેરો પર પ્રભુત્વ વધારવા દેવાને બદલે આખરે દરેક જગ્યાએ જાહેર પરિવહનની વ્યવસ્થા સુધારવા માટે સંનિષ્ઠ પ્રયત્નો થયા છે. કોલંબિયાના બગોટા શહેરના મેયરે કહ્યું છે કે, 'સૌથી વિકસિત દેશ એ નથી કે જેમાં દરેક વ્યક્તિ પાસે કાર હોય, સાચી રીતે વિકસિત દેશ એ છે કે જ્યાં પૈસાદારો પણ જાહેર પરિવહનનો ઉપયોગ કરતા હોય'. દુનિયાભરમાં પર્યાવરણની સમસ્યાઓને લીધે ખાનગી વાહનોના ફેલાવા સામે લાલ આંખ થાય છે. સવાલ એ છે કે આપણા ભારતીય શહેરો એ ઝુંબેશમાં જોડાશે કે પછી એવું ડાહપણ આવતા પહેલા ખાનગી મોટરીકરણના રસ્તે રંડાવું કે દંડાવું પડશે?

જેમ લોક્શાહીની સમસ્યાઓનું સમાધાન વધુ અને વધુ, મજબૂત-ટકાઉ લોકશાહી જ હોઈ શકે, સરમુખત્યારશાહી નહિ. તેવી જ રીતે ટ્રાફિકની સમસ્યાઓનું સમાધાન વધુ અને વધુ, મજબૂત-ટકાઉ જાહેર પરિવહન સુવિધા જ હોઈ શકે, ખાનગી વાહનો માટે અમર્યાદ રસ્તાઓ નહિ. બીઆરટીએસ અને શહેરમાં જાહેર પરિવહનને વધુ મજબૂત કરવાના સૂચનો નીચે મુજબ છે:

• કોઈ એક પરિવહન વ્યવસ્થા શહેરની બધી જ સમસ્યાઓ ઉકેલી શકતી નથી અને શહેરમાં દરેક જગ્યાએ પહોંચી શકતી નથી. અમદાવાદમાં અંદરોઅંદરના સંસ્થાકીય રાજકારણને બાજુમાં મૂકીને બીઆરટીએસ અને એએમટીએસને એકબીજા સાથે સંકલિત કરવાની જરૂર છે. મ્યુનીસીપલ કોર્પોરેશન અંતર્ગત બંને સંસ્થાઓ હોવાથી આ ધાર્યા કરતાં વધુ સહેલું છે પણ અત્યારે એક માનીતી રાણી અને એક અણમાનીતી રાણી છે. સંકલિત કરવું એટલે ટીકીટ, ભાડું, ટાઈમ ટેબલ વગેરે સંકલિત કરવું, એક-બીજાના સ્ટેશન કે પ્લેટફોર્મ સંકલિત કરવા અને બંને સિસ્ટમનું એક અમદાવાદની એક જ ટ્રાન્સપોર્ટ સીસ્ટમ તરીકે માર્કેટિંગ કરવું. મુસાફરો માટે સરકારી માલિકીના પ્રકારનું મહત્વ નથી તેમને માટે એક અમદાવાદની એક જ પરિવહન સેવા હોવી તે મહત્વનું છે. જેમકે, લંડનમાં અન્ડરગ્રાઉન્ડ મેટ્રો, લાઈટ રેઇલ (સ્કાય ટ્રેઈન), બસ, ફેરી સર્વિસ આ બધું જ 'ટ્રાન્સપોર્ટ  ફોર લંડન'ના એક જ નામે ચાલે છે અને આ બધું એક જ કાર્ડથી એકબીજા સાથે સંકળાયેલ સેવાઓ તરીકે ઉપયોગમાં લેવાય છે.
• શહેરમાં ગરીબ અને મજૂર વર્ગ માટે પરિવહનની વ્યવસ્થા તેમને રોજગારીની તકો પૂરી પાડવા માટે બહુ મહત્વપૂર્ણ હોય છે. જો તેમને કોઈ પ્રકારની સબસીડી આપવામાં આવે તો તે લાંબા અંતરની સાઈકલ સવારી કે ચાલવાનું પડતું મૂકીને પરિવહન વ્યવસ્થાના નિયમિત ગ્રાહક બની શકે છે. ખાસ તો આ પ્રકારની સબસીડી બધાય ને આપવી મુશ્કેલ હોય તો ગરીબ-મજૂર વર્ગની કામ કરતી બહેનોને જરૂર આપી શકાય.

ઓછા વપરાતાં સાઈકલ ટ્રેકને ટેકનીકલી સુધારી ન શકાય?
 ફોટો: Meanest Indian - Janmarg album on flickr

• બીઆરટીએસના પ્રોજેક્ટ રિપોર્ટોએ એવું વચન આપેલું કે નવા બનતા રસ્તાઓ પર ચાલવાલાયક ફૂટપાથ અને સુવ્યવસ્થિત સાઈકલ ટ્રેકનું નિર્માણ થશે. આ વચન નિભાવવા માટે JNNURMનું ભંડોળ પણ મળેલું છે. અત્યારે ખરાબ ડીઝાઈન, ખરાબ બાંધકામ અને આડેધડ પાર્કિંગને લીધે ફૂટપાથ કે સાઈકલ ટ્રેક વાપરવા જેવા રહ્યા નથી. આ સુવિધાઓને સુધારવાની બહુ જરૂર છે. 
• બીઆરટીએસ કોરીડોર ઉપર રસ્તાની સાઈડમાંથી બસસ્ટેન્ડ સુધી પહોંચવા માટે અને રસ્તાની બીજી તરફ જવા માટે કોઈ સુરક્ષિત વ્યવસ્થા નથી, જે સત્વરે થવી જોઈએ. 
• સમગ્ર બીઆરટીએસ કોરીડોર અને બીજા રસ્તાઓ પર મફત પાર્કિંગની જગ્યાએ પાર્કિંગ ફી ઉઘરાવવાની જરૂર છે. આ રીતે એક કાંકરે બે પક્ષી મરે છે: એક, પાર્કિંગનું નિયમન કરવા માટે બીજી કોઈ વ્યવસ્થા ગોઠવવાની જરૂર પડતી નથી અને બે, ખાનગી વાહનો દ્વારા જાહેર જગ્યાના 'ખાનગીકરણ'નું ભાડું વસૂલી શકાય છે.
• આ સાથે સાથે લાંબા ગાળાના આયોજન તરીકે બીઆરટીએસનો વ્યાપ્ત અને નેટવર્ક સતત વધારવા જોઈએ. જરૂર પડે અને જો પૂરતો ટ્રાફિક મળી રહેતો હોય તો મેટ્રોનું આયોજન પણ થઇ શકે. આ સુવિધાઓ ઉત્તરોઉત્તર વધુને વધુ સારી થાય તેવા પ્રયત્નો થવા જોઈએ. શહેરી આયોજન એ સતત ચાલતી પ્રક્રિયા છે અને તેને નિરંતર ચાલવા દેવી જોઈએ.

આખરે, વકરતાં ટ્રાફિક અને સાંકડા થતા રસ્તાની ચિંતા સરકાર અને દૈનિકો બંનેએ છોડીને સારા જાહેર પરિવહનની માટે ઝુંબેશ ચલાવવી જોઈએ. કોઈ પણ શહેર માટે સારા જાહેર પરિવહનની વ્યવસ્થા જેવો કોઈ વિકાસ નથી!