Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.
We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.
To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India:
CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd.
www.cbspd.com
|
customercare@cbspd.com
The rapid urbanization process, high vehicular population growth and mobility, inadequate transportation facilities, and inadequate traffic management practices have created a significant worsening of traffic and environmental problems in metropolitan Dhaka. The greater challenge thus for transportation professionals is to develop a sustainable transport system that meets the basic mobility needs of all urban dwellers at desirable safety and avoids the unacceptable level of congestion. This article reviews the strategic transport plan for Dhaka in qualitative and quantitative method and points out that unsustainable transport initiatives were so far undertaken to improve traffic situations in Dhaka. A sustainable city is one designed to address social, environmental, and economic impact through urban planning and city management. It is high time to undertake a long-term approach as well as emergency remedial measures to rectify the damage caused by the injudicious transport initiatives to the economy, environment, poverty reduction initiatives, and sustainable development and recommend the key issues for the sustainable transport plan for Dhaka.
*Address all correspondence to: mdmahabubul.bari@smec.com
1. Introduction
In Bangladesh, the growth of the urban population in recent decades has been tremendous and considerably more than the capacity of the urban infrastructure, resulting in low efficiency and severe shortages. The urban hierarchy of Bangladesh has been dominated by metropolitan Dhaka, the largest and most industrialized city with a population of about 13 million [1]. It is one of the most densely populated cities in the world and forms the world’s 9th largest agglomeration.
The transport environment in Dhaka was in a chaotic condition characterized by chronic traffic congestion and delays, lack of traffic management, conflict of districts and poor coordination among agencies, and increasing air pollution problems. Like other cities in South Asia, transport in Dhaka is heterogeneous. Fuel-dependent (FDT) and fuel-free transport (FFT) share the roads without lanes or other road disciplines. Busses are unorganized and fail to maintain schedules; other mass transit is absent; traffic management is inadequate, and heavy congestion, delays, and high levels of air and noise pollution are prevalent, as well as a high rate of road mortalities, with about half of victims being pedestrians. Acute traffic problems undermine the ability of the transport sector to sustain economic growth and a reasonable quality of life. In light of this situation, the Dhaka Integrated Transport Study [2] and subsequent discussions with the Government have highlighted the elements to constitute an urban transport strategy for Dhaka, and it has become the basis for the design of the Dhaka Urban Transport Project (DUTP) in 1998. Under the DUTP, Strategic Transport Plan (STP) was prepared by Dhaka Transport Coordination Board in 2005. The objective of the STP was to develop a long-term strategic transport plan for Dhaka city. The STP was revised in 2015. The revised STP (RSTP) is being now implemented by different government agencies like Dhaka Transport Coordination Authority, Roads and Highways Department, Dhaka City Corporation, and RAJUK under the guidance of the Ministry of Communication.
Urban planning that makes sense is essential to a city’s healthy expansion. Unplanned growth can result in several issues, causing suffering for city residents and making it difficult, at best, to solve such issues. However, poor urban planning is not much better—and might even be worse—than no urban planning at all. It is crucial to make sure the plan is properly thought out and likely to promote the health and well-being of urban residents when undertaking a task as monumental as creating a detailed area plan for a metropolis with 13 million residents.
Before discussing sustainable transport development for Dhaka city, it might be appropriate to see what is meant by it. Sustainable development is a pattern of resource use that aims to meet human needs while preserving the environment so that these needs can be met in the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Sustainable transport (or green transport) refers to any means of transport with low impact on the environment and includes walking and cycling, Transit Oriented Development (TOD), green vehicles, car sharing, and building or protecting urban transport systems that are fuel-efficient, space-saving, and promote healthy lifestyles [3]. It is not sustainable to build new roads and other infrastructure without simultaneously adopting restraining measures to keep travel demand under control. Any extra space provided by new roads simply induces extra demand for additional travel. Thus, effective demand management approaches should be integrated with any additional supply of facilities for personalized travel to ensure sustainable and balanced transport development. It is therefore imperative to conduct a detailed investigation by developing several package approaches combining both supply and demand management-oriented strategies to select the most appropriate package solution for Dhaka city.
In the article, both long-term strategic and recent transport policy directives adopted by the Dhaka Transport Coordination Authority and other concerned authorities in Dhaka city will be reviewed critically for raising awareness among the decision-makers and members of the public in general about the potential consequences of such initiatives from the perspective of sustainable transport development. The issues include:
Strategic Transport Project (RSTP 2015) [4] initiatives like elevated expressway, Eastern Bypass Project, underground metro, restriction on fuel-free transport, relocation of Kamalapur Railway Station, restriction on intercity busses, promotion of parking facilities, and recent transport policy actions that are being implemented by different government agencies like Dhaka Transport Coordination Authority, Dhaka City Corporation, RAJUK, Roads & Highways Department, Dhaka Metropolitan Police, and Bangladesh Railway that include reduction of bus routes, restriction on railway service from Kamalapur, providing absolute priority to car in lane use in major roads, restriction of crossings for fuel-free transport, widening of roads at the expense of footpaths, forcing pedestrians to use overhead crossings, and eviction of hawkers from footpaths.
This study is done by reviewing STP and RSTP as well as the outcome of those studies and trying to identify the impact of those through several data analysis results that are collected from different studies.
The objective of this paper is to identify the current condition of the transport system as well as the initiatives taken by different organizations that are not focused on sustainable transport system. Along with some of the proposed transport initiatives that will make more unplanned city toward future. Section 1 makes the scenario for the study. Section 2 explains the transport initiative, which was taken under STP. Section 3 explains the short-term transport directives. Section 4 explains the transport planning, which is taken under RSTP, and lastly, Section 5 includes the recommendations for a sustainable transport system.
The key policy directives of STP were to develop a long-term strategic transport plan for Dhaka city to solve the transport problems for Dhaka city’s ensuing economic developments. Although some of the policy directives of STP seem to be progressive and positive, the basic approach of the policy seems to be, to the some extent, flawed. The STP policy actions are mainly directed to provide maximum benefit to automobiles, ignoring the basic needs of sustainable transport modes like low-cost public transport, fuel-free transport (FFT), and pedestrians, which represent the majority.
The government decided to revise the STP in 2014–2015 and extend its timeframe to 2035 named Revised Strategic Transport plan (RSTP) and approved it in 2016. The RSTP expanded some STP programs while endorsing the majority of them. Around Dhaka, a two-layer arterial ring roads program was added. There are now only two BRT programs instead of the previous three. From three lines to five lines, the MRT lines program has been greatly expanded. Priorities given to the metro program were of a much higher order than other programs. The main features of RSTP are:
Integration with the creation of the network plan, the land-use plan, and future urban structure.
According to the network development strategy based on road hierarchy and amount of demand, the supply of road space is determined.
RSTP keeps the fundamental ideas of STP.
Coordinating the growth of public transportation with the motorway network.
Utilizing current and upcoming road space for the fastest-growing modes of transit, such MRT and BRT.
Prioritization of the CBD and immediate urban environment improvement.
Fully taking into account possible development areas and their requirement for effective public and private transportation networks.
By 2035, there will be about 38 million people living in greater Dhaka, according to STP and RSTP. A commuter demand of 61 million to 65 million people per day will result from this. Of these figures, 45% might be various forms of nonmotorized and pedestrian transportation. Still, 35 million people will need to travel using different motorized vehicles. Main recommendation from RSTP are: Five MRT, Two BRT, Three Ring roads (Inner, Middle and Outer ring), Eight Radial Road, Six Expressways, and Twenty-one Transportation hubs. A comparison of prime project between STP and RSTP is shown in Table 1.
STP
RSTP
Construction of three Bus Rapid Transit (BRT Line 1,2 & 3)
Construction of three Mass Rapid Transit (MRT Line 4,5 & 6)
Construction of Dhaka Elevated Expressway on PPP basis
Construction of Gulisthan-Jatrabari Flyover
Improvement of Tongi-Ghorashal Highway
Construction of Mogbazar Flyover
Construction of Dhaka Circular Road
Some major highway projects
2 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Line Construction [BRT Line 3 & 7]
Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) Line construction [MRT Line 1, 2, 4, 5 & 6]
Expressways
Ring Roads
8 Radial Roads
21 Transportation Hubs
Improvement of Circular Waterway around Dhaka
Improvement of Traffic Management
Table 1.
Comparison of prime project between STP (2005) and RSTP (2015) [4, 5].
Implementation strategy of RSTP is in three phases-
Short term (−2020)
MRT Line-6 and BRT Line-3 to be opened
Implementation of Traffic Management and Traffic Safety
Arterial road development at Mirpur and eastern Fringe Area to support urban development
Restructuring of bus networks, BRF (bus route francization), & replacement of bus terminals
Medium term (−2025)
Development of new MRT lines in the CBD
Implementing TDM strategies
Development of ring roads and arterial roads outside the DMA
Long term (−2035)
East–West MRT line construction
Construction of new MRT lines to connect regional centers and the CBD
Reconstruction of interurban roads.
In the following sections, some of the recent transport policy initiatives undertaken by the government in the light of the STP directives have been analyzed to explore the potential consequences of these policy initiatives.
2.1 Basic concept of multimodal transport development and STP approach
2.1.1 Conceptual fallacy
The concept adopted by STP for transport development concentrates mainly on the movement of vehicles on a road network. However, in order to maximize mobility and accessibility under a multimodal context, one should set one’s policy directives for the maximization of door-to-door movements of people and goods rather than of the movement of vehicles in a road network. In order to assess mobility of passengers in a mixed-mode urban environment like that of Dhaka city, it is imperative to evaluate transport alternatives with respect to door-to-door trips, not travel times within road links or vehicle-km. Link travel times or vehicle-km represent only a portion of a trip, which constitutes link travel times, waiting times, walking times, modal transfer penalties, and so on.
2.1.2 Sustainable transport development and STP initiatives
Considering the high demand of travel, environmental concern, and to balance the supply and demand sides in transport system, there is no alternative of sustainable transport system. Sustainable transport and congestion remain important topics of discussion in transportation research. Academic studies suggest that sustainable transport solutions, such as active modes of transportation, transit-oriented development, and intelligent transport systems, can help reduce congestion and improve environmental sustainability [6, 7, 8].
Considering the definition of sustainable transport development as stated earlier, it can be questioned if the ongoing STP initiatives pay due attention to sustainable transport development, due to the following reasons:
As regarding the STP decision-making process, it is obvious that in the top-down planning approach, the team was constituted involving a section of the urban privileged without wider participation of major stakeholders and socially deprived sections of the city. Currently, no effective public participation process is working in the planning and decision-making of Dhaka city, let alone transport planning. Public participation here is at the level of Passive Participation, that is, merely by informing people about different decisions made by the city authority without any consultation with the stakeholders or general people. Top-down planning approach is active in this total process. As a result, local problems and necessities are overlooked in most of the planning decisions taken here. Local interests come to direct conflict with the interests of the policy makers in most of the cases. Different urban local government institutes (e.g., Ward Commissioner’s office) are also not sufficiently strengthened to facilitate the process of public participation. The poor are the worst victim of this process. This total planning scenario places the poor peoples in the most marginalized positions where the urban transport and other related issues are mostly handled by different ad-hoc top-down approaches.
Lessons can be taken from the experiences of different cities of Brazil prior to participatory budgeting [9], when decisions regarding urban developments were the exclusive right only for the elite and the powerful. As is always the case in such scenarios, the tendency is to allocate resources for car-friendly (pro-rich) and capital-intensive projects, as is also evident in the STP directives. On the other hand, participatory budgeting establishes a process in which the effects of people’s involvement are directly seen in either policy change or spending priorities. It is not just a consultation exercise, but an embodiment of direct, deliberative democracy. In spite of widespread poverty, high levels of inflation, and widespread corruption, Porto Alegre was the first city in the world to implement participatory budgeting as an element of public policy. The “classic” approach that was created in Brazil is what led to the development of participatory budgeting in the UK and other countries across the world [10].
The approach of the STP might benefit the rich more by committing resources disproportionately in favor of either capital-intensive or auto-friendly options, which is not consistent with sustainable transport development and social equity for the present or future generation.
The STP presented a set of recommendations that allocate 63% of the resources for 8% of the total passengers, that is, metro passengers and 30% of the funds for the development of car-friendly projects, who represent only 5% of the city’s population (see Table 2). Yet this focus on highly capital-intensive and auto-friendly projects (pro-rich) actually ignores the findings of their own study, which identifies only a bus rapid transit with some moderate improvement of road infrastructures represents the most optimum solution. No similar concern was seen toward ensuring a pro-poor transport system like pedestrian facilities, balanced development for FFT, or development of bus transport system, when they allocated tiny amounts, that is, 0.24%, 0.24%, and 0.41%, respectively, of the proposed investment for them. It is therefore evident that STP policy directives are not compatible with sustainable transport development in Dhaka.
Mode
Peak Hour Passenger
Passenger per Day
Modal Share
Allocation of resources
% Allocation of resources
(Million $)
BRT
238,500
2,733,472
4%
266
6.27%
Bus
548,038
6,281,116
9%
17
0.41%
Metro
501,000
5,742,009
8%
2655
62.66%
Auto
1,888,424
21,643,410
31%
1279
30.18%
Pedestrian
855,067
9,800,006
14%
10
0.24%
FFT
2,076,590
23,799,999
34%
10
0.24%
Total trips
6,107,618
70,000,000
100%
4238
100.00%
Table 2.
Modal share and allocation of resources for passengers by mode for the year 2024 (after STP 2005) [5].
The adopted recommendations of STP disregard their own evidence and standard procedures as outlined in the technical appraisal of the report and use an arbitrary approach to select highly controversial and environmentally disastrous policy options with an expenditure of 4.2 billion US dollars, which requires 237% more capital investment than that required by what they themselves ranked as the optimal option. This represents a significant waste of resources without any valid technical and economic reasons and is in no way compatible with the objectives of sustainable transport development.
The STP planning process ignores the contribution of eco-friendly and sustainable transport modes like pedestrians, fuel-free transport, and all short trips, which constitutes the vast majority of trips (more than 76%) [11]. The term “multimodal” in the STP directives refers only to fuel-dependent transport, ignoring the contribution of pedestrians and fuel-free transport (48% of all trips) (STP 2005) [5] and all short trips (76% of all trips). Moreover, STP advocates the banning of eco-friendly and space- and energy-efficient transport modes, that is, fuel-free transport, from main roads, as well as termination of railway and inter-city bus services within Dhaka in order to facilitate movement of automobiles. These policy directives go against the very foundation of the sustainable transport development, which seeks to promote eco-friendly and space- and energy-efficient modes like FFT, busses, and trains.
Under a multimodal transport study like STP, as expected, the higher the relative investment in roads and autos, the greater will be wastage of fuel, damage to environment, and hence the overall disbenefits, as demonstrated in both the subjective and objective evaluations of the alternatives of the STP study [5]. More importantly, the STP study clearly demonstrates that there is no transport benefit from the Eastern Bypass Project (STP 2005) [5], a project designed to divert traffic by constructing a road cum embankment on the eastern side of Dhaka city, which has the potential for significant environmental and ecological damage. It also exposes the potential disastrous transport and environmental consequences of the elevated expressway project. Despite these facts, the STP recommended the inclusion of these auto-friendly projects with an increase of 64% in investment in roads, thereby defying the conclusive evidence of the negative consequences of such projects in the STP study [5]. This is in no way consistent with the objectives of sustainable transport development.
The STP study selected a series of eleven (original ten and a modified option) alternative transport strategies on the basis of initial assessment of technical information from a travel demand model as demonstrated in Table 3.
Transport Strategy
Level of Road Investment
Level of BRT Investment
Level of Metro Investment
Base Case
ROADS
NO BRT
NO METRO
Strategy 1a
ROADS+
ALL BRT
NO METRO
Strategy 1b
ROADS+
BRT
METRO
Strategy 1c
ROADS+
NO BRT
ALL METRO
Strategy 2a
ROADS++
ALL BRT
NO METRO
Strategy 2b
ROADS++
BRT
METRO
Strategy 2c
ROADS++
NO BRT
ALL METRO
Strategy 3a
ROADS+++
ALL BRT
NO METRO
Strategy 3b
ROADS+++
BRT
METRO
Strategy 3c
ROADS+++
NO BRT
ALL METRO
Strategy 3d
ROADS+++
NO BRT
NO METRO
Table 3
Alternative transportation strategies of STP (STP 2005) [5].
The study appears to be more or less successful in finding the preferred mass transit option for long trips, namely, Strategy 1a: Roads+, ALL BRT, and NO Metro, despite the STP model having a number of flaws. Strategy 1a represents a combination of moderate investment in roads and an intensive bus rapid transit (BRT) and mass rapid transit (MRT) system as the means for mass transit as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Proposed transport network in RAJUK area (source: RSTP, 2015) [4]. (a) Proposed MRT/BRT network for 2035. (b) Proposed road network in Rajuk area.
The option requires only a fraction (42%) of the total amount of USD 4.2 billion required by the alternative preferred, that is, Modified 2b Strategy in the STP. The Modified 2b Strategy represents a blend of mass rapid transit system of BRT and underground metro, complemented by 56 highway projects of varying widths, including an elevated expressway system of approximately 29 km length and two bypasses, that is, a midway venture between strategy 2b and 3b. It may be mentioned here that the Strategy 1a also represents the best option considering economics, safety, social development, affordability, and sustainability. The surplus resources could be better utilized for the development of a balanced multimodal transport system. To proceed with the planning, design, development, and implementation of the policy directives of STP, it is likely to involve the significant waste of scarce resources and damage to the cause of sustainable transport development.
In this connection, it might be appropriate to take lessons from the dismal failure of Dhaka Urban Transport Project (DUTP) [12, 13]. The strategy used in the DUTP was comparable to the STP’s suggested course of action. The project’s key features include the building of several flyovers, the prohibition of fuel-free vehicles from main highways, the need that pedestrians use elevated crossings, the widening of roadways at the expense of sidewalks, and so on. It should be noted that the project’s overall travel-time drawbacks outweighed its minimal transit time gains by at least a factor of twenty.
The project’s main conclusion is that there is no justification for wasting public funds on development projects like DUTP that harm the economy (well over Tk 7.78 billion per year), reduce mobility of people and goods, divide neighborhoods, sever service facilities, inflict environmental degradation, destroy the fundamental framework of sustainable development, deny vulnerable segments of society their fundamental rights to accessibility and inclusion, and all of these things [13].
2.1.3 Integrated multimodal approach
Both the STP approach and the existing transport planning approach tend to consider only motorized vehicles as the sole determining criteria in recommending steps to be taken for transport development in the city, completely disregarding other transport modes. Thus “passengers” as defined in this approach includes only those traveling by car, bus and underground metro. Rickshaw passengers, cyclists, and pedestrians are excluded from the data collection, analysis and transport model building process. Thus, those who travel with the least impact on the environment, use the least space, and cause little or no economic harm to the country, are considered unworthy of consideration in the overall traffic system. The Urban Transport Model used in STP disregarded all Fuel-Free Vehicle (FFV) and pedestrian movements, and all short trips considering them not relevant for a strategic transport plan, yet FFV and pedestrian movements represent about 50% of the total trips [4] and short trips constitute 76% of the trips in Dhaka City [11]. Therefore, the model or the planning process that disregards the majority of trips cannot be a valid one.
There is in fact no reason to believe that the options selected in STP represent an optimum solution. Recognized transport development organizations, such as the Department for Transport, UK which adopts much broader base approach no longer consider such approaches as valid practice under multimodal transport appraisal [14].
2.1.4 Integrated demand and supply management approach
It may be mentioned that the STP approach assumed an unconstrained increase of travel demand and considered only the supply side of the transport system, with an inherent bias toward auto-only development. Nowhere in the world has such car-centric transport policy been successful at easing traffic jams, reducing pollution, or increasing people’s mobility. The main beneficiaries of such a policy would be the richer section of the society.
One of the major key weaknesses of STP is its attempt to match demand for transport by constant supply of new infrastructure and road building under the assumption of unconstrained demand. Aggravating the problem is the failure to appreciate the fact that FFT acts as a deterrent on growth of future traffic demand.
2.1.5 Balanced development of local and regional transport
In order to develop a well-integrated multimodal transport system, it is imperative to strike a balance between the often-conflicting needs of local and nonlocal transport, where local transport involves both short and “within neighborhood” trips and access to longer distance transport facilities. In general, nonlocal transport, which represents long distance trips, is provided by motorized vehicle modes. On the other hand, local transport modes are predominantly pedestrian, cyclist, and cycle rickshaw. Although there is a tendency among decision makers, who generally represent the elite, a section of bureaucrats, and powerful section of the society, to replace FFT by fuel-dependent modes (particularly cars and motorcycles).
Equitable transport planning needs to ensure that the needs of both local and nonlocal transport are properly catered for and are well-balanced. However, in practice, urban transport planning is typically carried out through the use of transport master plans like STP, which formulate strategic long-term transport plans for a wide metropolitan area. Such master plans, by their very nature, inevitably put more emphasis on providing infrastructure for cross-city transport than on designing local transport measures. In situations of scarce resources, this can lead to a serious imbalance in planning priorities, with local transport frequently being “ignored,” as is the case with STP.
2.1.6 Road space vs. Total number of vehicles
According to specialists on the subject, the STP and current planning methodology appear to view Dhaka city’s transportation issues from a fairly limited viewpoint that does not take into account the overall number of cars. In a megacity like Dhaka, it is impossible to fix the transportation issues by building new roads and other facilities without also enacting restraints to keep travel demand in check. The concept, for instance, that any modern city needs 25% of space for roads is outdated and without any scientific basis. For example, Los Angles, which has 30% space for roads, is the most congested city of America. On the other hand, many cities in Europe, which have comparatively far lower proportions of road space, solve congestion problems by an integrated demand and supply management approach.
Any additional space created by new roads only increases demand for travel. In order to ensure a sustainable and balanced development of the transportation system, effective demand management strategies such as parking control, giving priority to fuel-free transportation, and controlling the growth of cars should be integrated with any additional supply of facilities for individualized travel. Instead of focusing solely on maximizing the movements of vehicles within the road network, the entire problem of congestion management should be examined from the perspectives of accessibility and door-to-door movements of people and products.
However, there is no denying the significance of figuring out the ideal amount of highways for Dhaka city. The STP research report states that the development of the ROAD+ option, which consists of 42 fundamental road improvement projects (29 new roads +13 currently opened for traffic or under construction), is the most optimal and well-balanced investment for the road network in Dhaka city. However, it is regrettable that the STP advisory group went well beyond the required level of investment in roads and suggested a solution that would not only need 231% more resources but also increase congestion and pollution, according to the study’s conclusions [5].
Additionally, the efficient use of urban space should not be seen from the standpoint of creating ever-larger roads for cars; rather, it should be considered from the need to facilitate an ideal number of trips, which includes reducing the need for travel by making sure that most facilities are located close to homes. The selected growth pole land use scenario of STP, which necessitates a higher number of long-distance trips, increases the need for travel and favors substantially higher road links and is not consistent with sustainable and “Smart Growth”, which favors the integration of mixed land uses in communities as a critical component to reduce congestion and achieve better living environments.
2.2 Construction of series of elevated expressways
It would appear that the decision makers including the top government officials are sometimes inclined to capital infrastructure development project despite the fact that they could have detrimental consequences like increase in congestion, pollution, expense, and significant reduction of accessibility for pedestrians and other sustainable modes of transport. The government just approved a project to construct a system of elevated expressways and flyovers of about 31 km. length. This system will cost roughly US $ 2 billion, or Tk 14,000 crore, to build.
Elevated expressways take traffic off of other roadways and produce their own traffic. They only benefit a tiny fraction of people who drive cars; frequently only move congestion from one location in the network to another; increase noise, pollution, congestion, and fuel consumption; and make walking and other sustainable means of transportation less accessible. As the former Mayor of Bogotá, Enrique Penalosa, rightly remarked, “There are two ways to destroy a city. One is through nuclear bombing, and the other is with elevated roads.”
In its model result findings, the STP study itself demonstrated the potentially disastrous consequences of elevated expressways. According to the STP study report, with the inclusion of the elevated expressway system, the overall transport system would suffer major deterioration in terms of increase in congestion and significant deterioration of the city’s environment. It is therefore evident that there was no justification for the huge investment for the potentially regressive and environmentally disastrous elevated expressway projects.
Evidence 8 also suggests that existing flyovers have actually caused an increase in traffic congestion on the roads below the flyovers. Many cities in the world have constructed multi-level elevated expressways but still could not reduce their congestion level. As a result, they stated to demolish them. Notable among them are Seoul in South Korea [15], San Francisco in the USA [16], and Tokyo in Japan.
2.3 Implementation of eastern bypass project
The Government of Bangladesh has decided to implement the Dhaka Integrated Flood Control Embankment-cum-Eastern Bypass Road Multipurpose Project with its own fund as it failed to find any international funding to finance the Tk 2750 crore (USD 400 million) megaproject. The main objectives of the project are to protect the people in the 124 square kilometers eastern part of Dhaka city from flooding and to reduce traffic congestion in Dhaka. The project is expected to begin under the current fiscal year 2010 and to be completed by 2016.
The Eastern Bypass, as experts and officials of the World Bank believe, will be another concrete jungle in the eastern side of the capital with a potential for huge negative environmental and ecological impacts. Such a project could induce siltation and in turn aggravate water logging and flooding problems, as experienced from similar misguided initiatives in many floods control projects in the Khulna-Jessore region (Bil Dakatia area) of the country. Environmentalists and experts worry that the “new city extension” on the eastern edge would be an environmental nightmare, resulting in permanent water logging and other hazards, similar to the western flood protection embankment, because no effort has been made to preserve the natural canals and water retention ponds before the project begins.
The model findings of the STP study indicate that the project has had no appreciable effects on the city’s general traffic situation in terms of reducing congestion. It demonstrates that there is little to no basis for this massive investment project and that there will be no real benefits to the economy or transportation from the construction of the Eastern Bypass. This is because the majority of journeys to Dhaka city are return trips [5]. A level of investment this high cannot be justified by the meager number of through trips. Despite this, the STP team unilaterally chose to include the Eastern Bypass as one of the core projects, despite the fact that it might have far-reaching detrimental environmental and ecological effects and has no ability to help the traffic problem in Dhaka city.
2.4 Promotion of more parking areas
There seem to be misconceptions that congestion can be reduced by providing sufficient parking facilities, as demonstrated in their parking policy and a number of recent initiatives. Free and inexpensive automobile parking spaces actually increase demand for car ownership and use, which in turn causes traffic congestion and pollution to worsen. Megacities all over the world have implemented a variety of parking restriction measures to lessen negative effects on the transportation system, including moving parking facilities outside the city center with park and ride facilities, completely banning the construction of new parking lots, and pricing parking to account for the opportunity costs of space use. Therefore, the idea of adding more parking places is counterproductive and a recipe for more traffic.
Cars are private property, whereas streets are public spaces. Car owners should be charged for the space that their parked cars take up, regardless of where that parking happens (with the obvious exception of the car owner’s private property), as they are one of the population groups least in need of a subsidy. There should be no subsidies for parking at any place because land is so expensive and in such high demand in Dhaka. Subsidies and space ought to be given to the majority rather than to the wealthy few, especially those who drive expensive cars, and should only be given to those who truly need them.
The Dhaka Transport Coordination Authority’s current parking policy has to be updated to set the maximum number of parking spots permitted rather than the minimum necessary. As a result, there would be no need to fine or tax property owners for not providing enough parking places, and it would be prevented from wasting a lot of money and land trying to satisfy the insatiable need for parking. It is necessary to change the Bangladesh Building Code to remove the requirements for required parking in commercial and office buildings. Many cities throughout the world, including San Francisco (in the US) and several cities in Europe, establish maximum rather than minimum numbers of spaces to be set aside for parking. On no account should property owners be forced to provide more parking than they wish, or be penalized for failing to provide “enough” spaces. This is because there are many alternative economical and environmentally friendly uses of the precious space of a city rather than allocating them mainly for car parking (Figure 2).
Figure 2.
Chaotic state of on-street free parking facilities in Dhaka (source: The daily sun, Dec 20, 2017) [17].
2.5 Construction of underground metro
Although the Metro option does not represent value for money, as it requires 63% of the total investment while serving only 8% of trips, the STP team opted for it without any tangible technical or economic benefits. Along the same lines, efforts are being made to construct an underground metro on a commercial basis. Building a mass transit system as a for-profit business operating on a profit-or-loss basis might not be appropriate. Despite the baseless claims of the investor, who claimed to create an underground metro system for a price that was far lower than a realistic estimate, a profitable public transit system would likely be expensive and out of the grasp of the average person. Social equality and integration would suffer if a business was run for profit. The right to accessibility and mobility would be denied to the most vulnerable members of society by such a transportation system. If a mass transit system is operated for profit, its basic purpose—to give the general public access to an affordable public transportation system—will be defeated. This is because it is very difficult to run an underground metro system within affordable price to common people without providing sufficient amount of subsidy by the government.
Before moving forward with the planning of the underground metro, it is also necessary to address serious issues with feasibility, such as cost (constructing an underground metro cost about 100 times as much per kilometer as building a bus rapid transit system), the need for abundant and guaranteed electricity, and difficulties with digging deep enough in a city that is prone to flooding.
Given the enormous expense of an underground system, a full cost–benefit analysis should be carried out to investigate other, significantly less expensive and difficult public transportation options, such as trams, guided busses, and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). The STP team has failed to recognize some major disadvantages of an underground Metro system. Before embarking on such a huge investment with comparatively little anticipated gain, policy makers should consider the following key facts in relation to an underground metro:
Without a proper integrated demand-and-supply management approach, it is unlikely that only an underground metro will solve the transport problems of Dhaka city.
According to travel demand analysis of the STP, there is no need of a metro system within the foreseeable future. The STP project travel demand model shows that even with a daily passenger demand exceeding 6 million passengers on a Dhaka BRT Phase 2 network in 2024, the peak volumes on particular corridors will not exceed 25,000 passengers per hour per direction, comfortably within the range of passenger capacities of BRT.
Metros have extraordinarily high operating expenses, necessitating the use of pricey electric rail vehicles. It will be extremely difficult to secure a consistent and ample supply of electricity for metro systems in Dhaka city. Globally, the majority of metro systems are operating at significant losses.
Worldwide experience is that, except in a few cases, the fare of the metro ride is subsidized, often heavily. The experience demonstrates that all of the Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) projects from the late 1990s are experiencing financial difficulties and are not in any position to become profitable.
In the Sao Paulo Metro, the City Government provides a $0.20 (25%) per-trip subsidy (total trips are 2.1 million per day). One of the more notable recent Metro and LRT disasters has occurred in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. There was a large fare subsidy in the system. As a result, the system experienced a financial catastrophe and was nationalized in late 2001. The system ran up debts of more than US$1.4 billion after just three years of operation, resulting in the largest corporate bankruptcy in Malaysian history. The 20 km Metro in Singapore, which cost US$2.9 billion to build, lost US$1.1 million each month in operations in 2004.
The STP suggested that the underground metro for Dhaka city have a minimum charge of Tk. 10.0 for a journey of 1 km. distance, which will be affordable for only a very tiny fraction of passengers if it is built and operated. It will be necessary for the fare to be at least 50% subsidized in order to make it affordable for people with middle-class incomes. The STP forecasts that the metro will carry roughly 57,42,000 passenger journeys per day with an average trip length of 5 kilometers. The daily subsidy will therefore be Tk. 143.55 million, and the annual subsidy will be Tk. 5240 crores.
Metro line building is frequently excruciatingly slow. For almost 8 years, work was being done on Singapore’s 20 km Metro. The 21 km long Blue Line Subway in Bangkok took roughly 7 years to build.
Any public transit system must also have the flexibility to grow and adapt to changing circumstances. Dhaka is expanding quickly, and the local environment is changing quickly as well. However, expanding the metro system is an extremely difficult task.
The cost of building a metro system per kilometer is around 100 times more than that of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system; hence, it is likely that the metro system will only cover a relatively small area of the city and be of little utility if private auto customers are not directed to the metro service.
2.6 Relocation of central Railway Station from Kamalapur to Gazipur
The suggestions for relocation of the existing railway station and container depot relocation of existing railway alignment and termination of rail line and all rail services at an appropriate northern point and relying upon intra-urban modes to distribute and collect passengers and goods throughout the city, which are among the recommended options of STP, are fundamentally flawed and counterproductive.
Discontinuing a vital and efficient transport mode does not mean disappearance of travel demand. If there remains a substantial demand for intercity travel at the heart of the city, it is pointless to make journeys fragmented for such trips, thereby significantly increasing travel time, discomfort, and modal transfer penalties. Some people may think that sixteen railway crossings are likely to slow road traffic and contribute to congestion if trains are allowed to run through the center of the city. However, they ignore the fact that the termination of rail service does not mean disappearance of travel needs to the center of the city for long-distance travelers. Since the demand for travel toward the city center will likely continue for most of the long-distance travelers, they will be forced to travel into the city center using a relatively larger number of smaller vehicles or taxi services, thereby contributing to more congestion and delays.
Dhaka Railway Station was shifted from Fulbaria to Kamalapur with a plea to reduce congestion. Instead, it proved to be a contributor of congestion rather than relieving it. In this connection, one should look into the examples of other successful megacities of the world. It is rare that a balanced multimodal transport system is developed in any city by relegating railway outside of its core area. The world’s busiest train station, Tokyo, was erected in 1872, and no one has ever considered moving it. It is where the famed bullet trains, as well as a variety of other long-distance and commuter trains, arrive and depart virtually daily.
It might not be economically feasible to run all trains in the city either overhead or underground while traveling within the city center. However, one should bear in mind that public transport such as railways should be assigned higher priority in comparison to auto travel or highways, and rail crossing waiting time can be optimally reduced by good signaling.
Instead of shifting rail stations from the center of the city, more rail stations need to be established to provide adequate inter-urban and long distance services. The railway stations within the city center must be easy to access and have entrance-level platforms, provisions for busses to pick up and leave passengers, space for taxis to wait in line to pick up passengers, and other facilities.
2.7 Proposal for segregation of Dhaka into different functional areas
The ongoing initiative for demarcation of Dhaka into different functional units is a matter of serious concern as regards development of a balanced transport system. Creation of more single use functional areas for Dhaka is a recipe for more transport demand and hence increases in congestion. A city as densely populated as Dhaka should consider the advantages of a mixed land use scenario similar to that of “Smart Growth”. Smart growth1 involves mixed land uses, an emphasis on access by proximity rather than bylong-distance travel, and therefore encourages the pollution-free modes of walking, biking, and cycle rickshaws. With mixed land use and high density, it is possible to achieve the sizable and diverse population and commercial base needed to support public transit.
Additionally, under the Central Spine Scenario, the choice of mixed land uses will be more in accordance with the Land Use Plan of the Dhaka Metropolitan Development Plan (DMDP), which chose a concentrated and mixed-use land development comparable to that of “Smart Growth.” In addition, such an approach would ensure provision for adequate open space and natural water retention areas and waterways as an integral part of all urban developments. The development of sustainable and “Smart” growth of a city demands adherence to a number of key features, such as: (a) development of mixed land use, (b) provision for a variety of transport choices, (c) reduction of the need to travel, and (d) creation of walkable environments.
By moving marketplaces, shops, places of employment, and schools into designated zones, Dhaka may be divided along functional lines, but doing so would just raise demand for long-distance travel and lead to further congestion.
2.8 Restriction on movement of intercity busses into the City
The government has decided to prevent the Dhaka bound inter-districts busses from entering the metropolitan area, which is also one of many policy directives of STP [4]. It is crucial to guarantee uninterrupted and smooth public transportation routes in order to increase transportation efficiency between and between various modes while acknowledging their complementary roles within a transportation system. Activities for the creation of high-quality logistics that account for all sources of transportation are included. It is important to handle intramodality in passengers and freight by implementing activities like terminal integration across all modes of transportation and offering seamless and competitive solutions.
Since the origins and destinations of the majority of travels for both intercity and local trips lie within the central area of the city, there is no justification for shifting intercity bus terminals or the railway station from the center of the city. The notion that reducing intercity travel by arbitrarily doing it at the edge of the city will result in fewer journeys is deceptive and useless. People will travel to the city’s center if there is a demand for it, possibly in less efficient, smaller vehicles that will cause additional traffic and pollution.
The development of a well-integrated public transportation system was set back by the construction of four independent intercity bus terminals without any means of interconnecting them. Smaller cars cause more traffic and pollution. In addition to severing innumerable journeys and encouraging the rise of relatively inefficient taxi services, this short-sighted strategy also encouraged less space-efficient automobiles within the city in comparison to more effective bus or rail systems, which proved a formula for additional congestion. Therefore, it is crucial to reinstate a Central Bus Station in the city’s center provide connections between all bus stations and let all intercity busses to use city roadways. But it would not be a good idea to use the Central Bus Station/Stations as nothing more than bus parking lots. Strict time schedules should be upheld for the prompt arrival and departure of busses to and from the Central Bus Station in order to maximize efficiency.
2.9 Planning for freight transport
It appears that there is lack of provisions for goods vehicle travel in the existing STP model and other planning approaches in Dhaka city. The requirements for adequate modeling of goods vehicle are threefold (a) to assemble base year patterns of movements by goods vehicles, (b) to develop procedures for forecasting goods vehicle movements over time, and (c) to establish procedures for modeling the responses of goods vehicles to changes in the transport system.
It is desirable to assign due importance to planning for freight transport in order to develop an integrated and sustainable transport system for Dhaka city.
From the perspective of transportation planning, it is crucial to implement a strategy that would maximize mobility for the vast majority of road users, not simply car drivers. The importance of pedestrian uninterrupted network is illustrated in many journals [18, 19]. The focus of transport development strategies might be on the movement of either people or vehicles. That is, it is sensible to give priority to the majority of road users like pedestrians, bicycles, and rickshaws, who create no pollution, use no fuel, use minimum space per passenger, and contribute the least to traffic congestion, as opposed to giving priority to the minority of road users, like car users who create the most pollution and congestion, as demonstrated in Table 4.
Traffic
PCU Value
Occupancy per vehicle
Occupancy /PCU
Fuel Use
Pollution Rating
Priority
Car
1.00
2.20
2.20
Very high
Very high
Lowest
Motorcycle
0.45
1.44
3.20
Very high
Very high
Low
Auto-rickshaw
0.70
2.08
2.97
Very high
Very high
Low
Minibus
1.50
41.50
27.67
Moderate
Moderate
High
Large Bus
2.00
88.40
44.20
Moderate
Moderate
High
Bicycle
0.12
1.10
9.17
Fuel Free
Zero Emission
High
Rickshaw
0.40
1.36
3.40
Fuel Free
Zero Emission
High
Pedestrian
Least Space
Very High per sqm
Very High
Fuel Free
Zero Emission
Highest
Table 4.
Space, fuel use and pollution rating of vehicles [5, 12].
In the urban context, the focus on movement of vehicles, which is analogous to minimization of vehicle-hours, tends to favor long distance and high-speed travel by any mode (but especially car), whereas the latter favors long distance and high-speed travel only by bus while giving emphasis to short distance travel by FFT and walking. Considering the nature of trips under mixed urban environments—that is, predominantly short trips—a people-oriented approach would ensure maximum mobility of the majority of road users by giving the pedestrian the highest priority followed by bicycle, rickshaw, and bus. On the other hand. The motorized paratransit should get lower priority, and cars should be assigned the lowest priority within a framework of an effective restrictive regime. Such a system would ensure the maximization of overall social and environmental benefits.
The current practice in Dhaka city tends to give undue advantages to a small segment of the urban elite—car owners—by giving them absolute priority in every aspect of the city’s transportation system at the expense of the mobility and convenience of the vast majority of road users, including pedestrians, rickshaw drivers, and bicycle riders. The undue privilege to cars has been manifested in terms of providing them with unlimited space for parking free of cost, creation of a high priority fast transit lane, giving preferential access along road links, ensuring uninterrupted movement at pedestrian crossings, giving undue long green times at traffic signals, reduction of bus routes, restriction of train timing, and so on.
In the following paragraphs, a description of different ongoing car-friendly initiatives and their potential consequences is outlined in brief.
3.2 Reduction of bus routes
Since the current initiatives are mainly directed to provide absolute priority to car owners, who represent less than 5% of the population, both approaches proposed significant increase of the modal share of cars at the expense of public transport. In addition to the investment of 4.2 billion dollars on capital-intensive projects, STP proposed to increase the share of motorizedd (non-transit) vehicles from the existing 18–31% at the end of the project in the year 2024 at the expense of public transport, as shown in Table 5.
Travel Mode
Base Case Scenario (year 2004)
After Project Scenario (year 2024)
Public Transit
34%
21%
Motorized (Non-transit)
18%
31%
Table 5.
Comparison of modal share of motorized traffic between base case and after project scenarios of STP [5].
Along the same lines as the STP approach, it is proposed to reduce the number of city bus routes to 40 from the existing 129 in the name of congestion management. Such an approach can neither reduce congestion nor ensure optimum utilization of road space when a car requires 88 times more road space per passenger in comparison to that of a bus (see Table 4). This will not only aggravate congestion but also increase the sufferings of the commuters drastically.
What the city needs is the consolidation and expansion of bus operation from the existing large number of uncoordinated small operators into a small number of well-integrated operators, rather than the reduction of the role of bus service in the future transport system of Dhaka. The STP study shows that some 800 individuals own approximately 1450 busses and minibusses, which represents the bulk of the bus fleet operating in the city. There are only about ten private operators having fleets of more than thirty busses, predominantly in the large-bus sector but including some prominent large minibus operators. It is therefore evident that the overall fragmentation of the industry remains very high. Such fragmentation has adverse impacts on on-street operational behavior; coordinated operation planning, vehicle safety, and travel time scheduling; and the optimum utilization of resources.
However, while consolidating the bus industry, care should be taken to avoid monopolies and corruption. In order for such measures to be successful, it is imperative to ensure proper implementation of a well-coordinated timetable. Moreover, care should be taken to ensure that any subsidy provided by the government for the consolidated bus operation indeed passes to its intended recipients, for example, passengers with special needs, women, the vulnerable, and the disadvantaged sections of the society.
3.3 Widening of roads at the expense of footpaths
Apparently guided by the erroneous notion of road and auto-only developments, the government has taken initiatives to provide automobiles absolute priority at the expense of pedestrians. Along a large portion of the routes in the city, all the shade trees were cut down, and the width of footpaths were reduced to widen the road, despite the obvious negative effects for pedestrians (see Figure 3). Such an approach promotes tiny or nonexistent decreases in travel time for one group, as against increases in inconvenience and travel time of another, who are in fact the majority.
Figure 3.
Road widening at the expense of footpaths and shade trees at Sewrapara-Farmgate road under DUTP (source: WBB trust) [20].
3.4 Restriction on fuel free transport (FFT)
3.4.1 Banning FFT from some major roads of the City
A number of roads in Dhaka city have had their FFT bans extended as part of ongoing strategy, including Kuril Biswa Road to Syadabad, Kakrail to Rajarbag Police Hospital, and Dainik Bangla Crossing to Syadabad. We should encourage rather than prohibit FFT use because it is more efficient in terms of space occupancy, energy use, and pollution rating (mainly rickshaws and bicycles). As shown by the conclusion of the DUTP after project study report, we should also take lessons from the past [12, 13].
Discussions about the problems with Dhaka’s transportation have centered exclusively on the need to increase vehicular mobility and the claimed role that cycle rickshaws play in causing traffic congestion for a number of years. According to this evaluation of the transportation situation, several projects have been started, with an emphasis on eliminating rickshaws and rickshaw vans off busy roads and occasionally confining them to rickshaw lanes. None of these transportation-related decisions were reached after a careful scientific analysis. Making important policy decisions in a somewhat haphazard manner has been the norm, whether it be with regard to the rickshaw ban or the city’s Strategic Transport Plan (STP).
The results of various anti-NMT initiatives have been made clear through government-mandated studies, including the HDRC report on the rickshaw ban on Mirpur Road (HDRC 2004) [11], and the DUTP after-study report [13]. The results, almost astonishingly negative, would suggest that the bases for the policy decisions and transport plans are flawed as important transport policy decisions were taken without employing any scientific study. Despite a 50% traffic growth of motorized vehicles from2000 to 2005, the traffic in terms of PCE (passenger car equivalent) in the Mirpur Road Demonstration corridor was significantly lower in 2005 in comparison to that in 2000. However, despite having fewer vehicles in 2005, the performance of the corridor in terms of key congestion indicators was significantly worse after the rickshaw ban.
Furthermore, despite abundant evidence of rising travel expenses and traffic congestion, transportation planning is emphasizing increasing the importance of the car and decreasing the role of fuel-free transportation. The ongoing expansion of the rickshaw prohibitions onto other metropolitan highways reflects this pattern. Without a doubt, rickshaws are superior to cars as urban transportation options in terms of the use of road space, energy use, and environmental concern. These are scientific facts [12, 13]. It would be better if we reintroduce rickshaws in all roads where rickshaws are currently banned, as an integrated public transit (PT) priority supplemented by FFT-only roads. In this connection, the recommended approach by STP consultants is worth mentioning. The STP Consultants in the Working Paper on Mass Transit [21] demonstrated that there is no need for bans of fuel-free transport. The Working Paper recognized the superiority of a combination of FFT, pedestrian, and BRT options and proposed three possible alternatives for roads of Dhaka city, namely: (a) a pedestrian lane +a single-lane bus rapid transit (BRT) for very narrow roads, (b) a pedestrian lane + a mixed mode lane + a single lane BRT for intermediate to major corridors, and (c) a pedestrian lane + one/two FFT-only lanes + one/two BRT lanes for intermediate to major corridors.
It is important to note that, unlike the main report, the STP Working Paper on mass transit did not propose any combination of BRT and fuel-dependent transport (FDT) solutions. If Dhaka introduces public transit (PT) priority measures, such as BRT or any other bus priority measures, there will be no need to give additional priority to cars and motorized paratransits. In conjunction with FFT priority measures, BRT or the specified bus priority measure will be able to meet the demands of intermediate and long trips. The majority of short journeys, which make up around 76% of all travels, will have their demands met by these.
3.4.2 Limiting the number of rickshaws
Neither of the two major studies so far conducted in Dhaka city, that is, STP (STP 2005) [5] and DITS (DUTP 1997) [22], recommended imposing any restriction on the number of rickshaws. These instead recommended that the optimum number of rickshaws should be determined by market forces. Despite this, the Dhaka City Corporation has arbitrarily come up with 89,000 as the number of rickshaws that will be allowed to ply in the Metropolitan area (Figures 4 and 5).
Figure 4.
So called “illegal” rickshaws seized by law enforcers being transported to the ‘rickshaw graveyard’ at Agargaon. (source: The daily star, Jun 02, 2018) [17].
Figure 5.
Hundreds of rickshaws kept haphazardly in the Agargaon dumping ground (source: The daily star, November 03, 2004) [23].
According to a study on rickshaws, they have been functioning under long term marginal equilibrium circumstances and are quite economically efficient (Bari 2000). This suggests that whether they are “legal” or “illegal,” the current number of rickshaws is optimal in terms of economic efficiency. There is no need to limit their population. Any suboptimal number may encourage monopolies, corruption, or unfair fare systems.
Rickshaws are in fact a better mode of transport especially in a megacity like Dhaka, in terms of energy efficiency, pollution control, traffic congestion, and travel demand management. There is no scientific basis of providing absolute priority to a tiny minority of car owners, who are the main contributor of congestion, while at the same time confiscating and destroying thousands of environmentally friendly and efficient rickshaws (Bari 2000) [24] as far as congestion management is concerned This is also tantamount to the infringement of the fundamental rights of the vulnerable rickshaw pullers to earn a living by legal means.
3.5 Restriction of railway services from Kamalapur
All over the world, train service is widely regarded as one of the most efficient and people-friendly modes of transport. It is almost impossible to develop a congestion-free transport system for a megacity without development of an integrated mass surface rail transport system. A train can carry thousands of passengers using a minimum amount of city space, thereby relieving congestion to a great extent. Yet guided by the policy directives of STP, which advocates termination of rail services within the city, city authority proposed significant reduction of flexibility of train operation within the city by restricting train services from 08:00 to 09:30 and 16:00 to 18:00 in order to ensure uninterrupted movements of cars. This will no doubt further hamper effectiveness and efficiency of a major public transport system of Dhaka, that is, railway at the expense of car owners, who represent 5% of the modal share.
3.6 Proposal for forcing pedestrians to use overhead or underground crossings
Serious contradictions exist between the stated policy directives and the desire to provide sufficient resources to support the objectives in the STP and the ongoing approach. While the STP recognized the need to adopt the “Pedestrian First Policy” in developing a balanced multimodal transport system, the policy was later abandoned while developing different alternative transport strategies. In the preferred alternative Strategy Modified 2b, only a tiny fraction, that is, 0.24% of the total investment, was proposed for pedestrian-oriented developments.
A pedestrian-friendly transport system is not possible to develop by providing inadequate resources for the development of pedestrian facilities. Moreover, in line with STP, Dhaka Metropolitan Development Plan (DMDP) (1995–2015) recommended construction of 41 pedestrian bridges and 5 pedestrian underpasses to ensure pedestrian safety. It is impossible to create a pedestrian-friendly transport system by hampering pedestrian movement by forcing them to use overhead or underground crossings. Despite the fact that these precautions were introduced in the name of pedestrian safety, Table 6 shows that pedestrian bridges have some of the worst records for pedestrian safety globally.
City
Pedestrian deaths/100,000 population/year
Use pedestrian over bridges?
London
1.9
No
New York City
2.2
No
Mexico City
15.4
Yes
Cape Town
19.4
Yes
Table 6.
Pedestrian bridges and pedestrian safety.
With the exception of high-speed limited access expressways, pedestrian bridges should be avoided except where there is a natural change in elevation, where direct entry to a building or an elevated pedestrian network is provided (as with the long-elevated walkway connecting Kamlapur railway station to Atish Dipankar Rd), or for crossing a waterway.
Pedestrian bridges are particularly burdensome to bus passengers, who as a group tend to more frequently cross roads than many other pedestrians. Instead of being viewed as facilities for pedestrians, the pedestrian bridges currently in use in Dhaka should be seen as facilities to improve the flow of motorized vehicles that would otherwise have to stop so people can cross the roads securely and conveniently.
In a densely populated urban area like Dhaka city, it is important to design intersections and other crossings by assigning pedestrians priority over vehicles, such as by: (a) ensuring uninterrupted movements of pedestrians, (b) forcing the vehicles to slow down or eliminate free-flowing motor vehicle turnings, (c) facilitating safe and priority pedestrian movements on all legs of the intersection, (d) allowing pedestrians to cross in a direct line across the intersection and clearly identifying the direction of travel for all pedestrians, and (e) letting the pedestrian see and be seen.
It is crucial to provide pedestrians with crossings at street level throughout the city. Only under extreme circumstances, such as when pedestrians must cross a busy road, a rail yard, a railroad, or a body of water, is grade separation practical. Using traffic calming techniques or installing a pedestrian-activated signal for an at-grade crossing is more appropriate for metropolitan streets. General experiences of grade-separated crossings have shown that the majority of pedestrians will not use an overpass or underpass if they can cross at street level in about the same amount of time, even though illegal road crossing jeopardizes their safety. It should further be noted that pedestrians must often travel significantly out of their way in order to reach an over-bridge or underpass, further adding to trip time and effort. Given that it is cars that are deadly, the onus for safety should be on them, not on pedestrians; rather than pedestrians dodging cars, cars should be forced to slow down and stop for pedestrians (Figure 6).
Figure 6.
Just to escape the “hassle” of utilizing the foot-over-bridge, people choose the dangerous option of crossing the road. The image was captured in the capital in Banani under the foot over bridge (the Bangladesh post, September 03, 2020) [25].
3.7 Eviction of hawkers
Despite the fact that one of the main causes of footpath blockages is parked cars, city authorities time and again start drives to evict hawkers and vendors in the name of facilitation of vehicular and pedestrian movements. The government’s preoccupation with drives is to remove hawkers/vendors from pavements while ignoring the problem created by unauthorized parking of cars as well as encroachment of footpaths by construction material. The city authorities systemically ignore the real problems that pedestrians face, including the unpleasantness and danger of walking along roads heavily trafficked by fuel-dependent vehicles, with their consequent fumes and noise.
Vendors can actually play an important role in attracting pedestrians, by providing something to look at and purchase and a presence that makes footpaths safer. Vendors should not be allowed to occupy the entire width of the footpath, but neither should they be banned altogether. They should be properly regulated under a comprehensive program to ensure that they remain as an integral part of footpaths without seriously hampering the pedestrian movements. In fact, many developed cities in the world, such as London, integrated street vendors properly by implementing a number of measures, such as allocating designated place for hawkers in the footpaths, converting a number of city roads into pedestrian-and hawker-only roads during working hours, and so forth. There is no reason why such pedestrian- and vendor-friendly approaches cannot be implemented in Dhaka city (Figure 7).
Figure 7.
Dhaka South City corporation, widely known as DSCC, evicted hundreds of street vendors from Gulistan (source: The new age, 11 September 2022) [26].
3.8 Priority for private cars
The ongoing initiatives are designed to generate undue advantages to car owners by giving them priority in all spheres of the city transport system at the expense of mobility and convenience for the majority of the road users, that is, pedestrians, rickshaws, and bus and rail passengers. The undue privilege to cars has also been manifested in terms of providing them with unlimited space for parking free of cost, providing tax relief for car imports, giving preferential access along road links in the name of rapid transit lanes, ensuring uninterrupted movement at pedestrian crossings and giving undue long green times at traffic signals, and so on.
3.8.1 Promotion of the import of reconditioned cars
While the ongoing bureaucratic initiatives have focused on restricting the number of rickshaws, bus routes, and even flexibility of train operation, there have been endless efforts to increase the number of private cars, which is the main contributor of traffic congestion. The government has recently relaxed restriction on import of reconditioned vehicles and allowed import of automobiles up to six years old, amending the existing limit of four years. This policy initiative has the potential for not only significant increase of congestion but also increasing pollution and fuel consumption.
3.8.2 Creation of rapid transit lane for cars
According to the Daily Ittefaq dated August 14, 2008, in order to ensure absolute priority of cars over busses and other public transport, the Traffic Division of Dhaka Metropolitan police has implemented the so-called Rapid Transit System (Lane System), which allocates an exclusive “Car only” lane in Mirpur Road and Airport Road in order to provide a tiny minority of car owners, who represent less than 5% of the population in Dhaka City, absolute priority over other modes of transport. While modern cities around the world have been putting restrictions on cars for effective demand and congestion management, officials in Bangladesh have been promoting car-oriented facilities for transport development.
3.8.3 Providing priorities for autos over other modes of transport at traffic signals
With its main goal apparently to provide convenience for cars along the main corridors with no regard to the effect on all other road users, the authorities in Dhaka City Corporation have set very high cycle times in the order of 150–180 seconds, with corresponding unreasonably long green times for the autos, ignoring the needs of pedestrians and other FFT modes. However, it is a standard practice to optimize signal setting within the domain of maximization of economic efficiency2, as in the widely used signal optimization tool, TRANSYT [27].
Logically, all signal timings should be set primarily in accordance with economic principles. At the same time, efforts should be made to maintain a people-oriented hierarchy of priority, that is, flowing downward from pedestrians, FFT, and busses, with cars gaining the least preference. On the contrary, the current practice provides undue priority to cars in the main corridors, thereby inconveniencing other road users as well as traffic in the minor roads. As a result, traffic in the minor roads regularly suffers long delays, and it has become almost impossible for a pedestrian to cross roads within a reasonable time [12].
4. Brief review of revised strategic transport plan (RSTP)
RSTP (2015) follows the same alleyway in policy level which is mentioned in STP (2005).
4.1 Shifting of inter-city bus terminal outside urban area
RSTP (2015) proposed shifting of intercity bus terminal outside the urban area. Prior to recommending indirectly for shifting intercity bus services outside urban area, it is essential to undertake a detailed traffic impact study.
In order to ensure seamless travel for long distance public transport travelers without much disruption or modal transfer, it is important to locate the interchange facility/terminal very near to the location of highest travel demand for such travelers, which are in general the City Centers or the Central Business Districts (CBD) of the City or town. While proposing multimodal transfer facilities, care should be taken not to shift intercity public transport terminal unnecessarily far way for the Central Business District (CBD). Discontinuing a vital and efficient transport mode, like intercity bus, does not mean disappearance of travel demand. If there remains a substantial demand for intercity travel at the heart of the city, it is pointless to make the journeys fragmented for such trips, and thereby significantly increasing travel time, discomfort, and modal transfer penalties.
Many developing countries follow the second model and intercity busses are not allowed to enter into the city center. However, validity of such a concept is questionable bearing in mind that a passenger bus is 30 to 50 times more efficient in terms of passenger carrying capacity per Passenger Car Unit (PCU) in comparison to a private car. There is no need to impose restrictions on intercity bus as far as congestion management is concerned.
It is not appropriate to propose public transport transfer facilities for intercity bus services on the basis of some pre-determined concept without any regards to the present and future travel demand patterns of long-distance travelers. Such a proposal could have far reached negative impacts for the development of a sustainable transport system for Dhaka City. It is better not to make any direct or indirect recommendation for shifting intercity bus terminal outside urban area without undertaking further study.
4.2 Transport planning in RSTP
The secondary and tertiary networks were not included in the traffic modeling; it solely examined the 1297 km primary road network. The majority of the subsidiary and tertiary roads in Dhaka are already severely congested; thus, the projected expansion of the main road network would greatly increase traffic volumes on those roads and cause delays (but this was not reflected in the traffic model). Along with this, 141 number of Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) are considered, which does not capture the intrazonal traffic.
In RSTP only, 5 modes, bus, car, motorcycle, rickshaw, and three-wheeled motorized vehicle, are considered for base year model (2014) and future model year. Pedestrian and rail are not considered in planning. But pedestrian needs to be prioritized for policy level.
4.3 Capacity of road and vehicle number in RSTP
RSTP (2015) has not analyzed the capacity of the road in Dhaka and how much vehicle can be allowed for Dhaka city. The RSTP does not explicitly show forecasts of future vehicle numbers in Dhaka. However, these can be roughly estimated from information in the draft report, particularly from: (i) current vehicle numbers and (ii) present and future (predicted) modal split. In fact, the current number of vehicles in Dhaka is not accurately known. Even auto numbers are not accurately known, because of weaknesses in the vehicle registration system.
4.4 Private sector investment
The RSTP primarily included future public sector investments in infrastructure; it did not consider broader private sector investments in Dhaka’s transportation, including the cost of purchasing and maintaining all the cars that make up the city’s transportation system. In a way, the RSTP did take these expenses into account when it identified “travel time savings” and “savings in car running costs” as the new infrastructure’s primary advantages. However, by concentrating on the ‘savings,’ we fail to comprehend the overall picture of the investment made in Dhaka’s transportation.
This section provides a brief discussion together with the conclusions drawn from the paper. This is followed by a list of recommendations for corrective measures for strategic policy directives and immediate remedial measures to avoid the adverse impacts of the ongoing and unsustainable transport interventions for relieving traffic congestion.
5.1 Conclusions
The key conclusions, as drawn from this paper, are presented in the following sections.
5.1.1 Bureaucratic reform
The success of any transport policy intervention would likely to be slim unless a thorough overhaul of the existing age-old bureaucratic system is undertaken, a people oriented reform of the bureaucracy is initiated, and a participatory and knowledge-based transport planning process is adopted without further delay.
5.1.2 STP policy directives
The STP initiatives cannot be regarded as sustainable transport initiatives because the approach:
Shows disregard to the majority of trips, that is, all short trips (76% of the total trips) and fuel free transport (48% of the trips).
Recommends to ban fuel-free transport in major roads and to restrict intercity busses and railways.
Invests maximum amount of resources (237% more) for the less optimal transport solution.
Promotes auto-friendly, inefficient, and environmentally unsustainable projects like Eastern Bypass, elevated expressways, and unnecessary road projects, defying findings of the STP study.
Encourages long distance travel and the demand for extra travel, both of which are likely to increase traffic and pollution.
Fosters long distance travel and the need for further travel, which will probably result in additional traffic and pollution.
Gives insufficient money and provisions for sustainable transportation systems, such as pedestrians, fuel-free transportation, and an integrated waterway system, and provides an excessive amount of resources for capital-intensive and car-friendly initiatives.
Promotes inequality and social injustice.
5.1.3 Current transport initiatives
The majority of the ongoing transport policy directives like reduction of bus routes, restriction on train services, providing absolute priority to cars in lane use, provisions for more parking spaces, and putting more restriction on FFT have the potential for negative impacts for the development of a congestion-free and sustainable multimodal transport system for Dhaka city.
5.2 Recommendations
The complete failure of auto-friendly and unsustainable transport initiatives so far undertaken to improve traffic situations in Dhaka should be a good lesson for transport and city planners. It is high time to undertake a long term approach as well as emergency remedial measures to rectify the damage caused by the injudicious transport initiatives to the economy, environment, poverty reduction initiatives, and sustainable development. The key recommendations of the article are presented below:
5.2.1 Knowledge-based and participatory planning process
In order to promote sustainable and pro-poor transport development, it is imperative to establish a knowledge-based and participatory transport planning process more or less analogous to the participatory budgeting approach of South America.3
5.2.2 Strategic policy initiatives
Rather than fixing a flawed STP study and set of recommendations, it would have been preferable to select a team for the strategic transport planning that has an interest in a broad range of issues, including health, environment, people’s well-being, and poverty reduction, as well as sustainable transport developments. Input from others all along the process would have helped to lead to a less biased result. However, as it is too late to change the entire process, it is important to consider what can be done to prevent any further, significant harm from occurring as a result of the misdirected process.
It is possible to incorporate provisions for sustainable development keeping the basic findings of the STP study. Despite the fact that the STP model has a number of shortcomings, the study appears to be more or less successful in identifying the preferred mass transit option for long trips, that is, Strategy 1a: Roads+, ALL BRT, NO Metro. Strategy 1a represents a combination of moderate investment in roads and an intensive BRT system as the means for mass transit. The option only needs a small portion (42%) of the total USD 4.2 billion that the STP-preferred alternative needs. In terms of sustainability, affordability, affordability, social development, safety, and economics, it also stands out as the greatest choice. By giving careful consideration to the following crucial problems, the extra resources could be used more effectively for the creation of a balanced multimodal transport system.
Based on the gap analysis between existing considering and best practice. Following are need to be improve:
Integrated transport planning and management
Adopt an integrated demand and supply management for sustainable transport.
Assess transport policy by examining wider policy issues.
Sustainable land use and development
Adopt a sustainable and smart land use policy to reduce travel demand.
Work with planning authorities to prevent new single use areas
People-cantered transportation
Prioritize door-to-door accessibility and mobility for people and products.
1.Statistical Pocket Book. “Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics”. 2008. Available from: http://www.bbs.gov.bd/dataindex/pby/pk_book_08.pdf [Accessed: September 15, 2009].
2.Dhaka Integrated Transport Study (DITS), Prepared for the Ministry of Communication, Government of Bangladesh, Dhaka, Bangladesh, UNDP Technical Assistance; 1994
3.WCED. “Our Common Future” – Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. UN: WCED; 1987
4.RSTP. The Project on the Revision and Updating of the Strategic Transport Plan for Dhaka, Prepared by ALMEC Corporation. Oriental Consultants Global Co. Ltd, Kathahira & Engineers International submitted to Dhaka Transport Coordination Authority, Tejgaon, Dhaka, Bangladesh; 2015. Available from: http://www.dtca.gov.bd
5.STP. Strategic Transport Plan for Dhaka – Final Report, Prepared by Louis Berger Group and Bangladesh Consultant Ltd. submitted to Dhaka Transport Coordination Authority, Tejgaon, Dhaka, Bangladesh; 2005. Available from: http://www.dtca.gov.bd
6.Sunio V, Mateo-Babiano I. Pandemics as ‘windows of opportunity’: Transitioning towards more sustainable and resilient transport systems. Transport Policy. 2022;116:175-187
7.Gössling S, Scott D, Hall CM. Tourism and Water: Interactions, Impacts and Challenges. Bristol, UK: Channel View Publications; 2020
8.Litman T. Transportation Demand Management Encyclopedia. Victoria, Canada: Victoria Transport Policy Institute; 2019. Available from: https://www.vtpi.org/
9.Souza C. Participatory budgeting in Brazilian cities: Limits and possibilities in building democratic institutions. Environment & Urbanization. 2001;13(1):159-184
10.cfe. Participatory budgeting from Brazil to Britain: What can you learn for your local authority?” innovative thinking collaborative action. 2010. Available from: http://www.cfe.org.uk/uploaded/files/Participatory%20Budgeting.pdf
11.HDRC. After Study on the Impact of Mirpur Demonstration Corridor Project (Gabtoli-Russell Square). Dhaka: Report prepared for Dhaka Transportation Coordination Board (DTCB), Human Development Research Centre; 2004
12.DUTP. Impact Assessment of DUTP: After Project. Dhaka: Final Report submitted to Dhaka Transport Coordination Board, by DHV Consultants BV, the Netherlands, Japan Overseas Co., Ltd., Japan, Finnroad Oy, Finland, Operation Research Group, India, SARM Associates Ltd., Bangladesh, Desh Upodesh Ltd., Bangladesh, Dev Consultants Ltd., Bangladesh in Dhaka Urban Transport Project (DUTP); 2006
13.Bari MM, Efroymson D. Dhaka Urban Transport Project’s after Project Report: A Critical Review, Roads for People. Bangladesh: WBB Trust; 2006. Available from: http://www.wbbtrust.org
14.White C, Gordon A, Gray P. Economic Appraisal of Multi-Modal Transport Investments: The Development of TUBA. UK: A report prepared for the Department of Transport, Local Government and the Regions; 2001
15.Water Front Toronto. “Future of Gardiner Expressway: Environmental Assessment and Urban Design Study” Case Studies. Canada: Water Front Toronto; 2009. Available from: https://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/
16.Carvero R, Kang J, Shively K. From elevated freeways to surface boulevards: Neighborhood and housing price impacts in San Francisco. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Place making and Urban Sustainability. 2009;2(1):31-50
17.The Daily Sun. 2017. Available from: https://www.thedailysun.net/
18.Adamiak C, Ferreira A. Analysis of human behavior in the use of a pedestrian street in Curitiba, Brazil. Sustainability. 2020;12(15):6098
19.Arici ME, Gencel I. Assessing the spatial and socio-economic aspects of street vitality in urban regeneration. Journal of Urban Regeneration and Renewal. 2021;14(1):17-31
20.Work for a Better Bangladesh Trust, Annual Report, Bangladesh. 2010. Available from: http://www.wbbtrust.org
21.Fjellstrom K. Public Transport and Mass Rapid Transit in Dhaka”, Working paper no 6. Strategic Transport Plan for Dhaka; Dhaka Transport Coordination Authority, Tejgaon, Dhaka-1208, Bangladesh; 2004. Available from: http://www.dtca.gov.bd
22.DUTP. Dhaka Integrated Transport Study, Phase II, Draft Final Report. Dhaka: A report submitted to the Government of Bangladesh, Dhaka Urban Transport Project (DUTP); 1997
23.The Daily Star. 2004. Available from: https://www.thedailystar.net/
24.Bari MM. Quantification of the Effects of Non-motorised Transport and Roadside Activities [Thesis]. UK: University of Birmingham; 2000
25.The Bangladesh Post. 2020. Available from: https://www.thebangladeshpostbd.com/
26.The Business Standard. 2022. Available from: https://www.tbsnews.net
27.TRL. Manual for TRANSYT Signal Optimisation Software. Berkshire, UK: TRL; 2010. Available from: https://trlsoftware.com/
Notes
According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_growth), the free encyclopedia "Smart growth is an urban planning and transportation theory that concentrates growth in the center of a city to avoid urban sprawl; and advocates compact, transit-oriented, walkable, bicycle-friendly land use, including neighborhood schools, complete streets, and mixed-use development with a range of housing choices"
It is essentially a traffic model of the network, which calculates a Performance Index (PI) in monetary terms, whilst an optimizing routine searches for the timings that reduce the PI to a minimum value, subject to minimum green and other constraints.
The participatory budgeting, which has been in operation in Brazil (Souza 2001) since 1989, is emerging as an innovative urban development management theme with an enormous potential to support cities in the adoption of socially integrated, inclusive, accessible, transparent, participatory and accountable urban governance and management, with a view to ensuring equitable and sustainable urban development.
Written By
Md Mahabubul Bari
Submitted: 06 July 2022Reviewed: 15 May 2023Published: 26 July 2023
Open access peer-reviewed chapter
