Bidding Adieu: Did Delhi's BRT System Really Fail?

When the Delhi government decided that cars with odd and even numbered licence plates should ply on city roads on alternate days, opponents of this policy had a valid argument. The public transport system in Delhi was not sufficient enough to meet the needs of the world's second most-populous city, according to United Nation's 2014 revision of the World Urbanisation Prospects.

Though Delhi is a prosperous city, with the recorded highest per capita income among all the states in India for the financial year 2014-15 and a one of the world's best metro systems, its first Bus Rapid Transit System (BRT) is on its way out. 

Clay Layton, the CEO of Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP) , however, made an important observation, in an interview with Hindustan Times: Delhi's BRT did not have the features that some of the successful BRT systems across the world have. PropGuide explores those features that make a BRT system successful:

Off-board fare collection: In off-board fare collection, passengers use coins or cards to make the payment at a sidewalk ticket vending system. This is similar to how they make payment in Delhi Metro. They would be able to enter the bus through the front door or back door. This tends to cut down commute time because buses need not be stopped at bus stops more than it is necessary.

Level Boarding: Level boarding implies that buses have boarding platforms that are on the same level as that of station platforms. Apart from being a great aid to physically challenged people, this is likely to make it easier for commuters to get on the bus with greater ease and speed. Passengers will also be able to de-board the bus more easily.

Mid-lanes for pedestrians: Mid-lanes allow pedestrians to move back and forth, without being slowed down by fast traffic.

As the BRT in Delhi did not have these necessary features, it would be too hasty to assume that it failed. Even though it is not true that BRT is not inherently better, BRT has certain advantages over light rail projects like a metro. For one, BRT is easier and cheaper to establish. The cost of building a bus rapid system is, throughout the world, cheaper than that of establishing metro lines or traditional rail systems. 

The construction time of a BRT is shorter too. It is also easier to dismantle BRT system when it fails. Like Delhi, in Washington Metropolitan Area, a BRT was also downgraded to allow cars. In some cases, however, even when busways prove to be very successful, they are opened for cars. For instance, Shirley Highway Busway in Virginia was opened to cars though it was proven to be very successful.

There are other important reasons, too. Even though Delhi is a dense city, it is not unusually dense by world standards. For metro lines to be more successful than BRT, density around transit stations could be higher than it is, at present. Low density around transit stations have led to lower frequency, lower passenger traffic, and lower profits from many metro routes. BRTs do not need such high density building because of low operational costs. As the structure of a city does not change in a few years, BRT seems to be important in Indian cities.

Cities like Ahmedabad have successfully executed BRT projects. Delhi, for example, would have much to learn from Ahmedabad's successful BRT system. Infact, when Pune's BRT system failed, its officials were sent to Ahmedabad to learn the best practices of the BRT system.