Will the concept of the point-to-point AC bus service help in getting motor car users to move to buses? Will it be useful in actually addressing transportation woes of the Mumbai as a whole or merely going to serve a small segment and to what extent?

The Mumbai Transformation Support Unit (MTSU) and Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking (BEST) are working to get a Point to Point AC Bus Service Scheme (P2PACBS) put in place. The scheme is to provide services from certain highly populated cooperative housing societies (CHS) to central business districts (CBDs). It is hoped that with such home to office trips in AC comfort provided, most members of the CHSs will opt not to take their personal motorcars out for their daily commute.

The concept is not new at all but then the buses used were the non-AC ones and were being operated by private bus operators. This system is still in vogue. It is interesting to go into details to compare with BEST staged services. A non-AC ‘contract’ bus with capacity of about 50, charge a monthly sum of Rs900 per person for a 10 km trip length twice a day. Since most offices open between 9am to 10:30am, and also close between 5:00pm to 6:30pm, the bus operators have to make as many trips as possible within the given peak periods. These buses then idle around.

Before the stricter norms for school buses came into vogue under the School Bus Policy, these buses were also being used on school trips. To enhance its income, the contract bus operator would try to reduce travel time by often bypassing traffic safety norms, which only a pedestrian or cyclist is able to observe as they are the most vulnerable groups affected by such flouting of safety norms. Also idle time parking is done wherever the contract bus operator finds place and narrow lanes become such parking places. They then keep the space reserved for themselves. Maintenance work is also carried out on these streets and footpaths if any get encroached upon to cater to the needs of drivers, washers, etc. The bus and the road/footpath space becomes dwelling for the bus staff.

From the commuter’s perspective, Rs900 per month of say 25 working days a month means the commuter pays Rs36 per day. For the same trip by BEST, it would cost Rs36 a day (latest Express bus service fare). But the BEST buses are loaded to 70 to 90 persons during peak period and frequency not necessarily to every commuter’s need or liking. These are also not from the gate of their CHS. Contract bus thus scores over BEST from fare as well as comforts point of view. “Organized corporate commuters” will find the P2PACBS scheme a great boon.

Basic operational costs of BEST buses are (i) driver’s and conductor’s salaries, (ii) fuel expenses (iii) maintenance of buses and (iv) depots for stabling buses. If the contract bus operator matched his driver’s salary with BEST bus driver’s, bus maintenance was as good as BEST’s (although lately that has been deteriorated too) and they paid for the parking too then surely for the level of service, the fare structure would significantly surpass the BEST fare structure as the private operator’s profit too has to be added to the overall costs. By parking on roads, there is a social cost citizens pay and usually these locations are rarely near residences of people who are affluent. Therefore, it is the less affluent who are providing facilities to the more affluent without in return receiving any facilities of improved general public transport; on the contrary they are subjected to greater hardships.

Only 2.8% of Mumbai citizens use motorcars. This number comes to 3.5 lakh. If the point-to-point AC bus service is hypothetically provided for all the personal motorcar users, it will benefit only 3.5 lakh people. This is because those not opting to take the new bus service will be driving in less congested road and the rest will be using buses. Since the suburban trains carry 75 lakh people daily in miserable peak period loading and the current users of BEST bus services are in perpetual traffic jam during peak period, their plight does not get addressed by this P2PACBS. Since P2PACBS will be like the contract bus service, it will be a fixed time service, providing no flexibility in terms of time. People do not like to lose their independence of travel. This constraint is not acceptable to the affluent in general. When in 1974 the petroleum products overnight became three times costlier, car pooling was resorted to initially, but practically within three months, people using personal motorcars returned to earlier independent use of own motorcars.

With the P2PACBS scheme in place, two scenarios could be visualized. (i) people in CHSs take the view that it is in their interest to be restrained by discipline imposed by the P2PACBS and travel in comfort or (ii) drop off the P2PACBS scheme as it is not being used adequately because non adherence to time by the commuters and thereby return to use of personal motorcars.

In my opinion it is the latter scenario that will emerge, with personal motorcars driven by employing a driver. Since a car is available and is being driven by the driver, it will be used by the family for dropping and picking up children going to school and college and spouses attending social events and shopping and host of other things, adding to the prevailing road congestion. Even if the former scenario emerges, personal motorcar shall get used for all other purposes mentioned thereby providing no respite from the road congestion.

Besides P2PACBS not providing independent mobility, it will also be subject to the normal delays of everyday traffic. All in all, I do not see any benefit from P2PACBS scheme but one.

What is that benefit I foresee by P2PACBS? People who try out the scheme and find life adequately comfortable will suggest or demand (i) shortening of journey time by asking for dedicated bus lanes and (ii) increase such services so that if they miss one bus they could board another. Since this will be demanded by people who are affluent, the suggestion will be given greater weightage. Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) fulfils dual purposes. Firstly it will delink the fixed time boarding requirement of the P2PACBS scheme by providing frequent services. Secondly, BRTS will have significantly excess carrying capacity that will facilitate general public in using this service as an alternative to the overcrowded railway and existing BEST services.

Whichever way MTSU, BEST or BMC proceed in addressing the transportation woes of Mumbai, it is hoped that they will put up an efficient and effective BRTS in place soon even if they initially look at addressing excessive personal motorcar usage aspect only.

(Sudhir Badami is a civil engineer and transportation analyst. He is on Government of Maharashtra’s Steering Committee on BRTS for Mumbai and Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority’s Technical Advisory Committee on BRTS for Mumbai. He is also member of Research & MIS Committee of Unified Mumbai Metropolitan Transport Authority. He was member of Bombay High Court appointed erstwhile Road Monitoring Committee [2006-07]. While he has been an active campaigner against Noise for more than a decade, he is a strong believer in functioning democracy. He can be contacted on email at [email protected])