Monorail as a solution for narrow roads

naveen, thanks for the stats. it was lacking here. really appreciate it. let us take this further. if you think of the area around MG road as one huge mall and amusement park can you use mono there? say i came to mg road from yeshwantpura by metro, i get down, others continue towards ITPL. next i want to go to commercial street, instead of taking an auto i take the mono. do my shopping, next i want to go magrath road, again i take the take the mono, get my work done, then again take the mono back to mg road, and then finally take the metro back to yeshwantpura. perhaps metrail can do a swiss challenge on that. what say? :) next level of this ban parking in CBD. only allowed to park inside building lots. increase footpaths, lots of people, make places like commercial street traffic free, increased foot count makes the place really retail friendly and since you have also simultaneously taken care of accessibility business also will not suffer. how to get from to here next questions, to achieve all this is mono required? without this type of feeder system can metro work?

Thursday night at 9:30 pm I saw a program in NGC. They were showing Tokyo City. Tokyo is even more congested than Bangalore and they were showing Monorails of Tokyo. They interviewed travellers in the mono. They told its very efficient with 99% uptime without any problems and is designed to carry 350 people at a time. It can pass through narrow roads of Tokyo seamlessly as said earlier in the thread and doesn't make any noise as the metro. I have seen in New York and Boston, whenever a train passes in the subway, there is so much of vibration and noise in the vicinity. In Boston, there are many lines Red Line, Blue Line,Green Line and Orange Line. Only Red Line is wider. spacious and faster - Others were all small and narrow - not even as wide as our city buses in Bangalore. These trains were slow and generating huge spark during turns with lots of Vibration too. Ofcourse for any normal train, if there are too many curves, it will slow down and in the curves, sparks will be generated. Monorail on the other hand runs on Rubber Tyres and hence will generate less or almost no noise. Since it runs on a single central rubber wheel, curves can be easily negotiated without any sparks. PHPDT debate will simply create the confusion about Metro and Mono. 350 people in a monorail is no bad figure. For congested roads it will be ideal. Ofcourse, we can have metro for the same route, but narrower metro will not serve any extra purpose, but will cause the extra problems I mentioned. Normal metro is difficult to construct in congested roads because of the land needed. People will debate go for underground metro in these areas. Underground metro will be too expensive and very time consuming to construct. There are two methods of constructing tunnels for underground metro - 1st is Boring and 2nd is cut and cover. Boring can be done only depending upon the geographical nature of surface area - not everywhere as we imagine - wherever boring is not possible, cut and cover method should be used - during this the buildings above the metro path needs to be demolished, tunnel should be build and covered again. On the elevated route itself, BMRC is working so slowly - I don't know how they will in underground routes. There are many BOOT operators ready to construct mono on their own, BMRC should just goahead with their proposed monoroute along with these BOOT operators on the proposed mono map (this map should be revised ofcourse). It can be implemented within 2 years. Atleast some part of the city gets the guided transport without the much wait. BMRC - wake up now and do something for mono!!! The cost mentioned about metro of 160 cr/km is only for elevated routes and not for underground route. Some of the figures are exagerrated by their corresponding fans to promote their fanship mode of transport. Here fanship/marketing shouldn't divert us, reality should come into picture. Volvo will say their BRTS model is better than these two and the construction cost is very less!!. To keep it simple - Have metro as the backbone of Bangalore - Connect it to most busiest places from ITPL to Nayandahalli, from Electronic City to Hesargatta passing through densly populated places of Bangalore. Have mono in congested routes connecting metro to all the important localities of Bangalore. Have BMTC buses connecting to metro/mono stations to internal parts of the city + Have the model said by cvikash of energy efficient vehicles giving door service from Metro/Mono Station + Prepaid auto counters connecting metro/mono stations. Ultimate aim, people should not use their vehicles in Bangalore!!!.

tarlesubba, Vasanth - your comments well noted. I will be uploading a letter that I intend to send to BMRCL under RTI Act, along with map/s. As you have correctly pointed out - most areas within CBDs should be made easily accessible, be it Metro or Mono or Metlite. The constraints for the govt are primarily cost/s, space, scope for expansion when loads increase & a fear that it may fail, after all the investments. All these form a great recipe for endless debate for our politicians ! Metro is attractive since capacities are huge - the 2.88m width chosen is standard width as in NY subway & London underground, also Paris Metro, all of which are in service for well over a century & have a proven record. Thus, trunk routes have to be Metro, even if they are noisy !

Hi! My letter to be sent to BMRCL is as follows - please review & advise your comments, thanks. Pertaining to the Metro & Mono-Rail for Bangalore, I request you to please advise me on the following queries that I have under the RTI Act. 1) The total length in phase-1 is abt 41 kms (less than 7km underground in CBD/dense areas). Studies by RITEs /iDeck reveal that even with the commissioning of NS & EW Metro lines as also Commuter rail services, congestion will not reduce significantly on several (52) key internal roads. Why is a more extensive Metro coverage not being pursued seriously & quickly ? Why are new alignments not frozen to work on financials & carry out the long processes before actual construction begins in order to solve transport problems expeditiously for hapless commuters ? In comparison, Delhi, which has an excellent road network, has frozen alignments for a vast Metro system over 230 kms (Four phases) & is quickly building phases I & II for completion by 2010 (with over 40kms underground in dense areas). Other examples are : Cheng Du (pop. 10 million) - 274km by 2035. HoChiMin (pop.3.5 million) - 195km by 2020. Hangzhou (pop. 7 million) - 278km by 2035. Shanghai (pop. 15 million) - 300km by 2025. 2) Is the target set for the Metro system for 2021 of 16.1 lakh commuters (at 15% traffic handling) appropriate ? Is it not desirable that a much larger volume be handled by the system & that mass transit systems eventually replace BMTC as the prime /preferred means for commuting to ensure that road traffic & pollution do not continue to remain excessive ? 3) The planned alignments for NS & EW Metro lines cover very little of the city’s central areas. Many cities such as Chicago & Marseille have a complete (underground) loop of several Metro lines in downtown, which enable commuters to alight close to their destinations & reduce the need for road-based public transport within CBDs. Delhi Metro is also planning Metro alignments similarly. Cannot Bangalore try to emulate these examples since the problem of road congestion can be dealt with far more effectively, & perhaps permanently with such an arrangement ? Is such a plan or any other non-road based system such as metro lines for various destinations that intersect at key nodes in different parts of CBDs under consideration ? Will this not positively minimize people from bringing their private vehicles into CBDs ? Will this not make it easier to regulate & impose traffic restrictions as needed by authorities as & when required ? 4) To explain my point, two maps of the city’s proposed transport system, as is being planned for by about 2015 (if all planned modes materialize) are attached. On Map-1 (http://flickr.com/photos/...), metro routes for Phase-2 are approximately what may be being planned since it may be easy to build, less expensive & palatable to the public since disruptions would be fewer. Map-2 (http://flickr.com/photos/...) shows routes for Phase-2 which are more realistic & in tune with needs. The route from Marathalli to Trinity circle has been extended passing through Richmond road up to Corporation & thence to Lal Bagh West (via JC Rd). The alignment has parts of it similar to what was proposed earlier for ELRTS. The other line from Silk-board junction to Hebbal is aligned through Diary circle, KH road, elevated over the Storm drain to Lalbagh Road, Mission Rd, Corporation, Kasturba road, Minsk square, Balekundry circle, Cant Rly Stn. & Mekhri Circle. Some sections will have to be underground & minimum private land acquisition will be involved for such a routing (as is being done for the NS & EW routes). Also, the route from Bannerghatta is shown extended from Adugodi thro’ Shoolay circle, Residency road, Mayo Hall, MG Rd & around Dickenson road to terminate near Commercial Street. Such a network, together with Phase-1 routes complete several “loops” & provides good connectivity within CBDs with interchanges & is far more functional (with seven interchange nodes at Majestic, Lal bagh West, Corporation, Cricket stadium, Trinity circle, Dairy circle & at Shoolay circle). The need to provide road based public transport within CBDs will be greatly minimized, private vehicles can be reduced drastically & road traffic regulated &/or restricted much more easily. Richmond Rd, which frequently gets clogged during school times is also covered, but this section may have to be underground. The additional expenditure & disruption during construction will definitely be worth since this routing, together with the NS & EW routes covers most parts of CBDs. Is such a routing not feasible ? Is it not sensible to get a good network in place within CBDs at the earliest as it will become more & more difficult later ? Will a similar layout not serve the needs of the public better ? 5) Three Monorail corridors are proposed on ring road & one along Bannerghatta road recommended by the study report by RITES Ltd, based on requirements for year 2021 & the MRMRTS project is being pursued. Since the cost for a Monorail system is only marginally lesser than an elevated Metro system, why is an elevated Metro system (or at grade, if feasible) not being considered for the ORR & Bannerghatta road (upto IIM), both of which appear to be headed for very high growth ? If running cost/s are going to be high (such as power consumption, etc.) & capacity is excessive for the present, cannot the no. of trains operating on these (presently) lower density corridors be fewer in no. & with fewer coaches initially (which will also lower initial costs) & when eventually density increases, as it is bound to, the system can be expanded by increasing the no. of trains & adding coaches as necessary, without having to debate endlessly as to what is to be done & then, finally cause more disruptions & waste funds by investing again in other system/s ? 6) Monorail was pursued by one prominent politician claiming much lower costs & ease of installation. However, this is not really the case as cost comparisons have shown & viaducts would still have to be put up. Is it not true that the Monorail system for ORR /BG Rd is being planned to reach a 'balance' within political circles & with a motive to 'please all' & not in tune with the reality of serious road congestion /transport problems that are staring us in the face & seem to threaten to be a bigger horror in the future (maybe after 2021, if not earlier) unless proper steps are taken immediately to address long term solutions ? Monorail systems in cities such as Sydney have not been much of a success & their capacity, as we know has limitations. Also, Monorail is generally designed for less denser routes & may work well for the airport–city link as also for connections to theme parks such as Bannerghatta National Park or to amusement /entertainment destinations on Mysore road, but here we are, planning to put it up on a 6-lane road with rapid growth & dense urbanization all along ! Is Monorail, which has only about 1/4th or 1/3rd the capacity of a Metro system, really suitable in the long run along these routes ? 7) A rapid bus system, running on dedicated corridors is being proposed from the northern side to the eastern /southern sides on the ring road (from Bellary road – Old Madras road – to Hosur road). This low cost bus system can perhaps cater to the immediate needs, if planned correctly (in Pune, it has been a total failure !) but, since the growth rates are already very high along ORR on the north-eastern & south-eastern sides & will catch up elsewhere, is it not appropriate to also pursue Metro routes in the long-term for the entire ORR, particularly since it would, in conjunction with the other ‘through the core’ Metro corridors provide good connectivity to the IT hubs in the south-east, as also provide for other commuting needs all around the city ? 8) The approximate total length of an elaborate & effective Mass transport system for public transport, as can be visualized now with easy options for further expansion would only be about 170 kms as follows : 1st Phase – 41 kms appx (NS & EW lines) 2nd Phase – 40 kms appx (Silkboard~Hebbal via Corpn, Cant & Marathalli~Lalbagh W) ORR & connecting laps – 90 kms appx The response & development of infrastructure appear too slow & as ad-hoc 'arrangements' to tide over the problem for the present. Long term permanent solutions are not being fully & properly worked out, addressed or concentrated upon & remedies are not being put in place in good time with endless debate. We have Beijing as an example where with high growth rates & excessive dependence on road based systems, & even after five ring roads, traffic & pollution continue to be serious problems with a subway system that is ineffective. Bangalore appears to be heading in the same direction – though it is very obvious that if a good transport network is not in place quickly, the city will lose out on it’s prominent IT status & become highly inefficient. Is it not prudent for BMRC, the body mandated to plan & provide mass transit systems, to prepare blue-prints for a long term strategy & work towards achieving it rather than work in installments as is the case now & has been all along with road /transport infrastructure planning in the city ? Why are projected statistics for 2021 being used as the bottom-line /benchmark for all mass transport development plans ? Would it not be wiser to look even further, now that an authority is in place & prepare a road map that will allow for quicker & easier additions & expansions in handling capacities as & when required anytime, even after 2021, rather than react only after commuters & the general public have been harassed & subjected to years of heavy road congestion & a great deal of inconveniences ? An example is the lack of thrust on the new airport transport link/s that has been criticized even by the aviation ministry. Clearly, Bangalore has been lagging far behind in creating transport infrastructure in tune with the needs & in due time. Can this never change, even after a Mass transit authority is in place ? JNNURM guidelines emphasize the need to encourage public transport. The UN State of the World Population 2007 Report states that over 40% of the country’s population will live in urban areas by about 2030, & Bangalore with an already high growth rate, will certainly see further growth rapidly, particularly since more & more jobs are being created each day here, climate is conducive, quality of life & the water situation at the moment is far better than most other metros. The city is bound to double it’s population within the next 15-20 years, given it’s increasing cosmopolitan character. However, there does not seem to be enough thrust in long-term transport infrastructure development strategies & the 'adjust maadi' culture seems set to continue until at some stage, total breakdown is reached. Awaiting your response, Sincerely,

sri thanks for that. i too think it will be a great idea to invite him here. put a link to your thread and send him an invite, will great to see what he thinks. :)

It is wishlist of everyone in Bangalore that Metro should pass everywhere in the city and be able to use it wherever they want. But, there are lot of problems that prevent to do this. 1. First and foremost factor is the funds - Bangalore metro is already budgeted at 6,000 crores for 33 kms only. Where to get extra money to build. New Delhi is capital city of the country and Central Government is ready to invest. But, not for Bangalore - It may be IT city - but for Central Government it is just like any other state capital. There is one way to over come this problem, i.e. BOOT method. But, there are no BOOT operators ready for Metrorail since it is very expensive and the risk factor in the investment is very high and bring down the company to roads if it fails financially. Also Government is not comfortable with BOOT. 2. Land - Although Metro when finished may occupy less land - during construction it is a major problem - Although temporary period - This temporary period itself will be near 5 years. Lot of people will loose their homes and shops. Whenever it is affecting them, people will start debating to go for other technology. If it is not, they will say Metro should have been planned here. Earlier there was a post saying that Elevated Metro should not be used since it will block the sky and even make the road awkward. Elevated metro is only 25% - 50% the cost of underground metro. Just to make city beautiful can we invest 12,000 crores instead of 6,000 crores? Underground Metro again has two methods cut and cover / tunnel boring. Tunnel boring is most expensive than cut and cover. 3. Construction Time - By the time we get sufficient funds and the entire Bangalore is covered, all of us who are writing to this website may not be alive!! 4. Problems in congested roads - Metro should go undergound in congested roads - But construction of underground metro costs more than 250 crores per km. 5. Bangalore is a huge city compared to other cities like NY (mannhattan), Boston etc. Covering the entire city by any mode of transport is totally impractical. Question is after investing so much will the people here use metro? Examples for this are many - In canada, I forgot the name of the city, metro was constructed and people didn't use it much which lead to huge loss for the entire state. Even Los Angeles Metro is a loss. Most of my friends say we should have had long running flyovers instead of metro/mono so that we could have travelled in our cars without any disturbance. These kind of people are almost 70% in Bangalore who hate to use public transport. Currently in Bangalore itself, for Volvo City Buses, there are very less passengers after investing nearly 1 crore for 1 bus. For buses there are not enough passengers and for passengers there are not enough buses. These kind of chances we cannot take in Metro. It will lead to huge loss. With all these factors, Bangalore cannot afford for a single mode of transport. Earlier I too had a notion after seeing Delhi Metro that entire Bangalore should be covered by Metro instead of various technologies. But, seeing the facts surrounding us practically - different modes of transport is needed. Still nearly 70% of the population of Bangalore wants to travel in their own transport - only bloggers like us promote andd debate about public transport. Whatever BMRCL has planned, a combination of metro and mono, is OK. Little bit tuning and quick implementation is what we need rather than entire new design. It is the predetermined notion among people about mono is preventing them to promote this. Japanese are practical thinkers. They have implemented Monorail successfully in Tokyo and is running efficiently - Planners of Japan cannot be underestimated. Major advantage of mono is we get BOOT operators - Without waiting for Government's investment, we get monorail running all over. It will happen quickly and Bangalore can get it in 2 years if started now.Energy efficient and less or no noise. Small Turning Radius - We can have monorail running on foot paths. Turning radius is as low as 30 meteres. Metro whatever the debate may be cannot have this turning radius since it has two wheels. This can be seen from the photos which TS posted. With all these advantages why the reluctance of people to accept a technology? If the roads are wide, we can also have BRTS without much investments just building dividers. Technologies should be selected depending upon the suitability, cost/km and return for investment.