Metro Rail Systems in India

Background and Context

• Indian cities require planned growth with attention to transport systems
• Motor vehicle growth causes congestion and pollution
• Improving public transport systems is necessary, including options like metro rail, bus rapid transit, and light rail
• Urban Rail (Metro Rail) has grown substantially in India
• Cities need metro rail for mobility requirements

Metro Rail Project Finance

• Financed by central and state governments, or state governments alone, or private partnership
• Metro rail projects are high-capacity, capital-intensive public transit
• Alternative funding sources should be explored to supplement budgetary resources
• Proposals should enhance urban mobility, speed, and quality of implementation
• A metro rail policy is needed for sustainable decisions considering social, economic, and environmental factors

Financing Models for Metro Rail in India

• 50:50 Joint Venture: Predominant model started with Delhi Metro Rail Corporation, followed by metros like Mumbai Line-3, Chennai, and others
• Full Funding by Central Government: Examples include the first metro in Kolkata by Indian Railways and East-West corridor in Kolkata (74:26 equity sharing between Ministry of Railways and Ministry of Urban Development)
• Complete Funding by State Government: Examples include Metro rail in Jaipur and Monorail in Mumbai
• Public Private Partnership (PPP): Mumbai Metro Line-1 and Hyderabad metro rail with Viability Gap Funding (VGF) from Government of India; Rapid Metro in Gurugram fully funded by the private concessionaire

Benefits of Mass Rapid Transit Systems (MRTS)

• Facilitate easy and quick movement
• Positive impact on economic growth and quality of life
• Leads to increased income and various benefits to society
• Reduces external costs like traffic congestion, road and parking costs, transport costs, and per-capita traffic accidents
• Reduces per capita vehicle ownership and usage
• Encourages compact and walkable development patterns
• Lowers the cost and time of travel, improving a city's competitiveness
• Substantial reduction in per capita pollution emissions results in huge public health benefits and reduces various chronic diseases

Options of Mass Rapid Transit Systems (MRTS)

• Mass transit systems can be classified into 5 categories
• These enhance urban mobility and reduce congestion
• These systems each have different transit capabilities

Busways and Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS)

• Physically demarcated bus lanes along the main carriageway with segregated corridor
• Buses may be given priority at intersections through signalling systems
• BRTS is an enhanced busway form with features like pedestrian facilities, Non-Motorised Vehicles (NMV), and associated infrastructures

Light Rail Transit (LRT)

• Generally at-grade rail based mass transit system
• Segregated from the main carriageway

Tramways

• At-grade rail based system that is not segregated
• Often moves in mixed traffic conditions

Metro Rail

• Fully segregated rail based mass transit system, which could be at grade, elevated, or underground
• Has a very high capacity of 40,000 – 80,000 passengers per hour per direction (PPHPD) due to physical segregation and system technology
• Includes monorails, which have lower capacities and higher maintenance cost

Regional Rail

• Caters to passenger services within a larger urban agglomerate or metropolitan area connecting the outskirts to the center of the city
• Greater number of halts at smaller distances compared to long distance railways but fewer halts and higher speeds compared to metro rail
• Common in large metropolitan cities
• Helps decongest city center by providing safe, speedy access for commuters residing in less congested suburbs

Choice of Metro Rail vs other Mass Transit Systems

• Choice of a particular MRTS will depend on a variety of factors like demand, capacity, cost and ease of implementation
• BRT or LRT systems at grade may require linear pathways or reduce space for other traffic
• LRTs and Tramways without horizontal separation lower speed and capacity
• Capacity of MRTS is denoted by passengers per hour per direction (PPHPD)
• BRTS capacity: 10,000-15,000 PPHPD on a single lane
• Metro rail systems can carry much higher passenger volumes, up to 80,000 PPHPD
• Rail systems generally provide rapid service, a higher quality ride, and service regularity due to grade separation
• Choice of mode will depend on the overall feasibility of the transport system

Metro Rail: Urban Ttransport

• Essential to formulate urban transport plans with overall perspective and feel of the city
• Proposals for central assistance for a metro rail project must be initiated by the State Government
• Because “Urban development” is a State subject in the Constitution

Importance of a System Approach

• Comprehensive approach needed for urban land use and transport infrastructure planning
• Apply a system approach to multi-modal transport systems in a city
• Represent a city by land use zones superimposed with matching transport networks
• Treat the urban area as a system, recognizing interactions between land use, traffic, and transport
• It is possible to predict future requirements and evaluate alternative modes for the most optimum mobility plan
• A Comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP) is a mandatory prerequisite for planning metro rail in any city
• Cities with a population of two million or more may start planning for mass transit systems including metro rail based on the CMP
• Integration is needed between roadway, railways, non-motorized transport to encourage people into public transport
• Integrate existing railway suburban services or circular rail systems with the metro rail and other transport modes
• Service providers should collaborate through signing a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
• State Governments should constitute Unified Metropolitan Transport Authority (UMTA) as a statutory body to integrate planning and management of urban transport
• The UMTA would prepare a Comprehensive Mobility Plan, organize investments, establish effective coordination among urban transport agencies, and manage the Urban Transport Fund (UTF)
• Consider a stake of the local body like municipal corporations or city development authorities who operate in the urban area

Coordination When Projects Transcend State Boundaries

• Need for governments to synergize efforts in providing a comprehensive transport system
• Can be formalized through a Memorandum of Understanding between the States

Alternative Analysis for Selecting Metro Systems

• Metro rail provides high capacity rapid transit, though capital intensive but has a long life of 100 years and beyond, with limited flexibility in design changes after construction
• Metro systems suit growing cities with prospective population increase
• Best suited for cities with teeming population and favorable future growth prospects
• Decide on a system with due care and after a systematic and unbiased analysis of different alternatives
• Spatial patterns are important
• Cities with a well spread out spatial pattern, even if highly populated, may not have enough corridors with adequate density
• Cities with a linear spatial pattern may justify a metro even at lower population levels
• Comparative analysis of alternate modes is essential for transit mode selection
• Choose the mode that matches the demand projections over the project life cycle and has the least cost
• The alternative analysis report will have to be necessarily incorporated when seeking central assistance
• Make the analysis comparable among various alternatives, a horizon of 30 years or more may be taken for forecasting the cost and revenue variables

Project Report For Metro Systems

• The project report is key for assessing feasibility and central assistance
• The report should examine techno economic feasibility and include
  • Infrastructure provision for various modes of transport and integration of various modes of transport
  • Last mile connectivity
  • Seamless transfer
  • Common payment instruments
  • Universally accessible infrastructure
• Pricing of urban transport is for public policy
• Should be determined in a manner that incentivizes modal shift from private vehicles
• Pricing should not be seen as enhancing financial viability as purpose of the mode is to bring economic, social benefits to the area
• Financial support of state and local authorities is essential

Economic Appraisal of the Metro Projects

• Urban projects are treated as public projects, delivering public goods
• appraisal of projects should entail cost / benefit analysis
• Projects provide greater social benefit for time and cost reduction and reduction in ailments
• Projects should have a minimum economic internal rate of return of 14% for approval
• State Governments should commit to setting up and operationalise UMTA within a year
• Cities with Metro may consider UMTA set up within one year
• State governments should commit to providing assistance

Allied Investments in Metro Projects

• Metro Rail should be seen as urban transformative
• These projects should lower travel distances, lowering consumption and lower emissions
• Areas around the metro should include utility capacity to improve urban density
• The project should provide adequately for security

Transit Project Viability

• Public transport aims to improve transport, reduce pollution, and encourage transit
• These projects should be examined while acknowledging the social benefits
• Innovative methods should be implemented to curtail expenditure and improving income

Revenue Enhancing

• Proposed transit projects must include connecting feeder systems and catchment area of five kilometers
• Last step connectivity should include pedestrian walkways, transport and para transit integration
• Government should require providing a feeder system
• Proposed projects should include “Transit Oriented Development - TOD ” with inter-modal connections, walkways, and bike sharing
• Ample parking should be provided in stations for transit users
• Any guidelines issued by state and central are to followed for VCF and TOD
• Transit should promote revenue through building commercial and housing
• TOD policies and revenue should accrue to special vehicles for transit
• Transit should have a chapter on improvements to non-fare revenue and revenue through innovation
• Government shall enable policies, permission, clearings, and permits through one window

Economic viability of Transit projects - Reducing costs

• Costs should be reduced following set guidelines
• Transit systems should promote indigenous productions with bulk tendering by forming state organizations
• Transit projects are governed by law

Economic viability of Transit projects - Fare structure, bond issuance

• Government shall fix fares based on provisions
• Government shall issue long term debt bonds
• Security by the government shall lower rate to attract investment

Project Evaluation

• Projects needing assistance are selected using a government-appointed panel
• Projects are evaluated through a selected format

Project Monitoring

• Implementation and progress of projects should be monitored using standards

Private Participation

• Government encourages private participation to assist development through skill and fund partition
• Government aims for PPP, projects should explore possibilities

PPP and Government

• All PPP forms for government are welcome
• Government offers ways for PPP
• Construction of transit by firms to build and operate
• Giving operating sub portions that include other rolling stock
• Contracts to upgrade structures

Government and Firms

• Private transit may include signaling to promote efficiency
• Private partnership may include private firms promoting service
• Government can contract services or costs plus performance bonuses
• The private firms can manage costs or collect costs but those carry risk options

Government support projects

• Government projects will include any government help or direction with the VGF(Viability Gap Funding) scheme
• Central aid may come from central plans giving 10% of project funds to give funding for government
• Funds will be given for project progression
• PPP with local government to implement, manage, or collect will be required

Ownership Sharing

• Projects can have ownership sharing between area government and state
• State government will be selected by government and ministry chosen

Transit funding can come from

• Project support from subordinate debt and taxes subject to 20% funds minus costs and land
• State and federal funding available through the above method
• Government consultation will take place for projects necessary for a city