Post on 07-Oct-2020
Construction of Infrastructure for BRT Green Line, Karachi PC-1 Form – September 2014
Annexure-VII
Review Report
JICA Study For Karachi Transport Improvement Project Prepared In December 2012
Review Of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
September 2014
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
i September, 2014
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 1-1
1.1 NESPAK’s Scope of Work .................................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) Concept ............................................................................... 1-1
1.3 Green Line BRT Route ........................................................................................................................ 1-1
1.4 The Project of Green Line BRTS ..................................................................................................... 1-2
1.4.1 BRT Infrastructure .............................................................................................................................. 1-2
1.4.2 Revenue Generation / ITS System ................................................................................................ 1-2
1.4.3 Rolling Stock .......................................................................................................................................... 1-2
2 Review of Green Line BRT Route ............................................................................................................ 2-1
2.1 JICA Proposal ......................................................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 NESPAK’s Comments, Suggestions and Recommendations ............................................... 2-1
3 Intersections and U-turns .......................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 U-turn / Rotary at Municipal Park (Aurangzeb Park) .......................................................... 3-1
3.2 Gurumandir Intersection .................................................................................................................. 3-2
3.3 Intersections along Nawab Siddique Ali Khan Road ............................................................. 3-3
3.4 Intersections along Shahrah-e-Sher Shah Suri Road............................................................. 3-3
3.4.1 A.O Clock Tower Intersection ................................................................................................ 3-3
3.4.2 KDA Roundabout ........................................................................................................................ 3-4
3.4.3 Five Star Chowrangi .................................................................................................................. 3-5
3.4.4 Sakhi Hassan Chowrangi ......................................................................................................... 3-6
3.4.5 U-Turn along Shahrah-e-Sher Shah Suri ........................................................................... 3-6
3.4.6 Intersections along Shahrah-e-Usman .............................................................................. 3-6
3.4.7 Nagan Chowrangi ....................................................................................................................... 3-7
3.4.8 Powerhouse Roundabout ....................................................................................................... 3-7
3.4.9 Surjani Chowrangi ..................................................................................................................... 3-8
3.4.10 U-turn along Shahrah-e-Usman ............................................................................................ 3-8
3.4.11 Access to BRT Depot ................................................................................................................. 3-8
4 Selection of Vehicles ..................................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 JICA Proposal ......................................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions ....................................................................................... 4-2
4.2.1 Type of Bus ............................................................................................................................................. 4-2
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
ii September, 2014
4.2.2 Air-conditioned & Non-Air-conditioned Buses ....................................................................... 4-2
4.2.3 Fuel Selection ......................................................................................................................................... 4-3
5 Green Line BRT Stations ............................................................................................................................. 5-1
5.1 JICA Proposal ......................................................................................................................................... 5-1
5.2 NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions ....................................................................................... 5-1
6 Preliminary Cost Estimates ....................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1 JICA Proposal ......................................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1.1 Base Year ....................................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1.2 Currency ......................................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1.3 Exchange Rate .............................................................................................................................. 6-1
6.1.4 Construction Cost ....................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1.5 Procurement Cost....................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.1.6 Project Cost Estimate ................................................................................................................ 6-2
6.2 NESPAK’s Review of Cost Estimate .............................................................................................. 6-2
6.2.1 Infrastructure Cost Estimate ................................................................................................. 6-2
6.2.2 Revenue / ITS System Cost Estimate ................................................................................. 6-3
6.2.3 Bus Procurement Cost Estimate........................................................................................... 6-3
6.3 Infrastructure Maintenance Costs ................................................................................................ 6-5
7 Economic Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 7-1
7.1 JICA Proposal ......................................................................................................................................... 7-1
7.2 NESPAK’s Review of Economic Analysis .................................................................................... 7-1
7.2.1 Quantitative Impacts ................................................................................................................. 7-2
7.2.2 Qualitative Impacts .................................................................................................................... 7-3
7.2.3 Project Cost ................................................................................................................................... 7-4
7.2.4 Operation and Maintenance Cost (O&M) ......................................................................... 7-4
7.2.5 Vehicle Operating Costs ........................................................................................................... 7-6
7.2.6 Value of Time Cost for Users .................................................................................................. 7-9
7.2.7 Benefit and Cost Flow ............................................................................................................ 7-11
7.2.8 Sensitivity Analysis ................................................................................................................. 7-13
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
iii September, 2014
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
ADB Asian Development Bank
AFCS Automated Fare Collection System
AVL Automated Vehicle Location
B/C Benefit-Cost
BRT Bus Rapid Transit
BRTS Bus Rapid Transit System
CKD Complete Knock Down
CNG Compressed Natural Gas
EIRR Economic Internal Rate of Return
HOV High Occupancy Vehicle
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
KCR Karachi Circular Railway
KMC Karachi Metropolitan Corporation
KMTC Karachi Mass Transit Cell
KTIP Karachi Transportation Improvement Project
KUTC Karachi Urban Transport Corporation
MRT Mass Rapid Transit
NESPAK National Engineering Services (Pvt.) Limited
NPV Net Present Value
OD Origin-Destination
O&M Operations and Maintenance
PCU Passenger Car Unit
PIS Passenger Information System
ROW Right-of-Way
TOR Terms of Reference
VAT Value Added Tax
VOC Vehicle Operating Cost
VOT Value of Time
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
iv September, 2014
LIST OF TABLES
Table 6-1: Summary of Infrastructure Cost Estimate .............................................................................. 6-4
Table 6-2: Summary of Revenue / ITS System Cost Estimate .............................................................. 6-4
Table 6-3: Summary of Articulated Buses Procurement Cost Estimate ........................................... 6-4
Table 7-1: Estimation of Economic Cost of Construction & Procurement ....................................... 7-5
Table 7-2: VOC Cost Assumptions .................................................................................................................... 7-7
Table 7-3: Yearly Estimation of Vehicle Operating Cost (VOC) Savings of Users ......................... 7-8
Table 7-4: Yearly Estimation of Value of Time (VOT) Savings of Users ........................................ 7-10
Table 7-5: Cash Flow Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 7-12
Table 7-6: Sensitivity Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 7-13
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 3-1: U-turn Proposal at Municipal Park (JICA) ............................................................................. 3-1
Figure 3-2: Alternatives for Busway at Roundabouts (JICA) ................................................................ 3-5
Figure 4-1: Proposed Vehicle as per JICA Study ......................................................................................... 4-1
Figure 4-2: Typical Articulated Bus ................................................................................................................. 4-2
Figure 5-1: BRT Station as per JICA study..................................................................................................... 5-1
LIST OF ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A - BRT Route proposed in JICA Feasibility Study
ANNEXURE B - BRT Corridor
ANNEXURE C - BRT At-grade / Elevated Sections Proposed by NESPAK
ANNEXURE D - Typical Cross-sections proposed by NESPAK
ANNEXURE E - Elevated Rotary at Municipal Park
ANNEXURE F - Green Line and Blue Line Corridor Merging at Gurumandir
ANNEXURE G - Typical BRT Station Layout
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
1-1 September, 2014
1 Introduction
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) has studied the public transport system of
Karachi and prepared a Feasibility Report for Karachi Transportation Improvement Project
(KTIP) (Volume-II), in December 2012. The JICA report contains feasibility study of two of the
six (6) Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) routes; i.e. Green Line and Red Line, and also conducted the pre-
feasibility study of a Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) corridor, the Blue Line. Green Line BRT route is
planned to facilitate the passengers to and from the densely populated residential area in the
North of Karachi to Central Business District in the South of the city.
1.1 NESPAK’s Scope of Work
Karachi Mass Transit Cell (KMTC) appointed National Engineering Services (Pvt.) Ltd. (NESPAK)
as Consultant to prepare PC-1 of the Green Line Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) System. KMTC also
requested NESPAK to review the JICA feasibility report in view of the ground conditions and
the recent developments along the route as well as the construction of Blue Line route with
respect to construction of Blue, Yellow, Red and Orange line BRT routes.
NESPAK’s review is limited to the proposals of JICA without disputing and analyzing the data
adopted by JICA related to field surveys and travel demand modeling.
1.2 Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) Concept
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) is an innovative, high capacity, low cost public transit
solution that can significantly improve urban mobility. This permanent, integrated system
uses buses on roadways or dedicated High Occupancy Vehicles (HOV) lanes to quickly and
efficiently transport passengers to their destinations, while offering the flexibility to meet
transit demand. BRT systems can easily be customized to local needs and incorporate state of
the art, low-cost technologies that result in more passengers and less congestion on roads.
1.3 Green Line BRT Route
The proposed route for Green Line runs from Municipal Park near Eidgah in Saddar to KESC
Power house in Surjani. The alignment of Green Line has been proposed along M.A Jinnah
Road toward northeast up to Gurumandir, and after Gurumandir the Green Line will turn
northward along Business Recorder Road, Nawab Siddique Ali Khan Road, Shahrah-e-Sher
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
1-2 September, 2014
Shah Suri and Shahrah-e-Usman, passing by some of the major landmarks such as Numaish,
Gurumandir, A.O. Clock Tower, Board Office and Nagan Chowrangi.
1.4 The Project of Green Line BRTS
The Project comprises of three (3) components, namely:
1.4.1 BRT Infrastructure
Construction of BRT infrastructure shall include at-grade and elevated corridors, excavation
works, piling works, concrete works for foundations / piers / slabs / girders, asphalt and
concrete pavements, BRT stations including finishing works, pedestrian structures,
installations of lifts at stations, lane markings, signage, and other allied facilities.
1.4.2 Revenue Generation / ITS System
Procurement and installation of Revenue generation and Intelligent Transportation System
(ITS) is an integral part of the scope of works. Revenue generation will include Automated
Fare Collection System (ACFS), workstations, fare media, fare gates, handheld ticket
machines, software etc.
ITS system shall include Automated Vehicle Location (AVL), real-time Passenger Information
System (PIS), operating system, database application, software and related components.
A security surveillance system shall also be procured and installed as part of the project.
1.4.3 Rolling Stock
Procurement of roling stock is part of the project.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
2-1 September, 2014
2 Review of Green Line BRT Route
2.1 JICA Proposal
JICA has proposed that the Green Line BRT shall be constructed at-grade along the entire
route. As per the available data, JICA considered that sufficient space is available along the
entire route. The route proposed by JICA is attached as Annexure – A.
2.2 NESPAK’s Comments, Suggestions and Recommendations
NESPAK has reviewed the JICA proposal and considering the specific issues of each stretch
like existing traffic volumes, parking spaces permanently occupied by the users/encroachers
and limited availability of lanes after the construction of Green Line BRT for rest of the traffic,
the entire route proposed by the JICA has been divided into the following four sections. Each
section along with the issues related to them are given hereunder:
Section – 1: Municipal Park to Gurumandir
This section of BRT Green Line runs from Municipal Park near Eid Gah to Gurumandir via
Radio Pakistan, Garden Square, Taj Medical Complex, Purani Numaish and west of Quaid-
e-Azam Mausoleum.
There are four closely spaced signalized intersections in this section with heavy traffic in
all directions. These intersections / signals remain heavily congested / jammed almost
the whole day. The signalized at-grade BRT system at the four locations will cause
substantial delays to the BRT and the existing / future mix traffic, which will negate the
very purpose of the proposed intent of BRT. Introduction of Transit Signal Priority (TSP)
at these intersections will further delay the mix traffic. At the same time, due to heavy
congestion, the intersection may not be clear for the BRT service to benefit from the
priority signaling concept.
Section – 2: Gurumandir to Lasbela Bridge
This section of BRT stretches from Gurumandir to Lasbela Bridge.
Although the Right-of-Way (ROW) for at-grade Green Line BRT is available as per the data
provided in JICA Feasibility Report, however, after the implementation of Green Line
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
2-2 September, 2014
corridor with at-grade arrangement, the available ROW for the existing traffic will be
reduced considerably, resulting in significant pressure on the lanes available for rest of
the traffic. The lanes available after completion of BRT which are already operated at low
Level of Service (LOS) are occupied by parked vehicles and roadside business activities. If
the government agencies employ force to get rid of encroachments, the resistance from
encroachers may lead to undesirable political / social issues.
Section – 3: Lasbela Bridge to No. 1 Chowrangi (Golimar Chowrangi)
This section of BRT Green Line is from Lasbela Bridge to No. 1 Chowrangi (Golimar
Chowrangi) via Sanitary Market.
The reservations regarding ROW of this section are the same as given in section 2 above.
Section – 4: No. 1 Chowrangi (Golimar Chowrangi) to KESC Power House
This section of BRT Green Line runs from No. 1 Chowrangi (Golimar Chowrangi) to KESC
Power House via Model Park, Baqai Hospital, Public Park near Nazimabad Flyover, Metric
Board Office, KDA Chowrangi, Hydri Market, Five Star Chowrangi, Erum Shopping
Emporium, Nagan Chowrangi, U.P. Mor Intersection, Road 2400, Power House Chowrangi,
Jumma Bazar, Sakhi Hasan Chowrangi, Road 4200, 2 Minutes Chowrangi, Surjani
Chowrangi and KDA Chowrangi, Surjani Town.
There are U-turns, intersections and roundabouts in this section, which shall cause
disturbance for at-grade Green Line BRT once developed.
Refer Annexure – B showing the four sections of Green Line BRT.
After studying all the sections, NESPAK is of the view that Green Line needs to be elevated for
Sections 1, 2 & 3 i.e. Muncipal Park near Eid-gah to Chowrangi No. 1 (approximately 6 KM,
refer Annexure – C) in view of the reasons mentioned above.
As per the JICA study, Green Line BRT Section 1 from Municipal Park near Eid-gah to
Gurumandir was run at-grade where Blue Line Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) will either be
underground or elevated. In view of constructions / obstructions discussed above for the
Green Line BRT in this section i.e. Municipal Park to Gurumandir, NESPAK is of view that
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
2-3 September, 2014
Green Line BRT should be elevated to avoid the delays due to these four intersections. In case
Blue Line will be planned to be constructed as an elevated section, it will become the common
corridor. Keeping the planning of Blue Line, it is suggested that the elevated section from
Municipal Park to Gurumandir shall be designed to take the loads of MRT.
NESPAK’s recommendation for elevated Green Line BRT for Section 1 is in line with Final Pre-
Feasibility Planning Study Report prepared by the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in
September 2007.
An additional parking space for at-least six buses is also proposed near Gurumandir to
facilitate the commencing of operations of Green Line BRT from Municipal Park near Eidgah
in the morning.
Refer Annexure - D for typical cross sections of Green Line BRT.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
3-1 September, 2014
3 Intersections and U-turns
All the significant intersections and U-turns of the Green Line are discussed below along with
JICA’s proposal:
3.1 U-turn / Rotary at Municipal Park (Aurangzeb Park)
i. JICA Proposal
The turning point of Green Line along M.A. Jinnah Road is proposed at Municipal Park having
an area of 850 Sq. Meters, which is sufficient to accommodate for the U-turn lane of BRT,
however, the park needs to be demolished to accommodate this U-turn.
The present mix traffic lanes for the straight direction to Tower will be diverted to the outer
of the bus way to avoid the interruption between the bus way and the mixed traffic lanes. A
traffic signal will be installed before the turning point.
The terminal station is planned to be located at the U-turn point.
Source: JICA study team
Figure 3-1: U-turn Proposal at Municipal Park (JICA)
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
3-2 September, 2014
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
As suggested by NESPAK that Green Line BRT should be constructed as elevated section,
therefore, this U-turn / Rotary will need to be elevated with the consideration of Blue Line in
the future. This rotary is proposed to accommodate space for providing relief to bus drivers
against fatigue and it will also help in commencing the operations from Municipal Park near
Eidgah in the morning.
Refer Annexure - E for rotary proposed for Green Line BRT at Municipal Park near Eid-gah.
Annexure ‘E’ shows two options for the elevated Rotary at Municipal Park with Blue Line
consideration. The final option will be decided at detail design stage.
3.2 Gurumandir Intersection
i. JICA Proposal
This is one of the busiest intersections along the study corridor. Presently, vehicles from
Business Recorder Road to M.A. Jinnah Road circulate Gurmandir instead of making a right-
turn. The bus way is proposed to be directly connected between the two roads north and
south to avoid delay of BRT vehicles at the intersection. Traffic movements of existing mixed
traffic lanes will remain the same as existing movements. Considering the heavy traffic at the
intersection, an underpass or flyover is proper for the bus way. However, this was not
proposed because of the future plan of the railway system (Blue Line) along M.A. Jinnah Road.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
As discussed earlier, Green Line and Blue Line (MRT) will be merged at this point in future.
Green Line will run elevated at Gurumandir to meet the elevated structure of Blue Line.
Additionally, the elevated infrastructure for Green Line at Gurumandir is proposed to
accommodate space for parking of six buses and will help in commencing the operations from
Municipal Park near Eidgah in the morning. This parking space shall be used for the stacking
of buses to meet the service demand at Municipal Park.
Refer Annexure - F for the merging / diverging arrangement of Blue and Green Lines at
Gurumandir.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
3-3 September, 2014
3.3 Intersections along Nawab Siddique Ali Khan Road
i. JICA Proposal
There are three signalized intersections along this road, namely, Lasbela Chowrangi,
Nazimabad Chowrangi, and Nazimabad No.7 Chowrangi. BRT stations are proposed to be
located near Lasbela Chowrangi and Nazimabad Chowrangi. Signaling phase should be
changed at these intersections for right-turn movements.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
JICA proposal was valid for at-grade intersections only and after elevating the Green Line
between Chowrangi No. 1 (Golimar Chowrangi) to Gurumandir, provision of Signals at these
two intersections is no more required. Similarly, the intersection at Nazimabad No. 7 is also
not required after restricting of movement from Paposh Nagar to Imtiaz store for improved
traffic management.
3.4 Intersections along Shahrah-e-Sher Shah Suri Road
3.4.1 A.O Clock Tower Intersection
i. JICA Proposal
Upward and downward lanes are located in the median of roads separated only by chatter
bar and pavement marking between Municipal Park and A.O. Clock Tower. On the other
hand, both lanes are separated by the wide median space from A.O. Clock Tower to the north.
The intersection should be modified and A. O. Clock Tower (Board Office Chowrangi) should
be removed for the bus way.
In the master plan, another BRT line is proposed from this intersection to Orangi Town along
Dr. Adeeb Rizvi Road, namely Orange Line. Although the layout change in the intersection is
not so large, it will be necessary to modify the intersection again when Orange Line is
introduced.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
3-4 September, 2014
JICA stated in its report that "KMTC proposed demolishing the flyover and constructing KCR as
elevated structure to KUTC (Letter No. 63-1/KMTC/KUTC-KCR/2012/10). If KCR is elevated
over the crossing road, the transfer between KCR and BRT will be more convenient.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
As mentioned by JICA in the study, it has been decided in principle that the bridge over
railway track between Nazimabad Chowrangi No. 7 and A.O. Clock tower (Board Office
Chowrangi) needs to be demolished to accommodate the elevated KCR track.
The existing bridge is not only used by the traffic using Sher-Shah Suri Road but also
facilitates traffic coming from Paposh Nagar and other adjoining areas that intend to go
towards Nazimabad Chowrangi No. 1 and onwards. It is therefore recommended that before
demolishing this bridge, another bridge should be constructed at A.O. Clock Tower (Board
Office Chowrangi) which will accommodate not only the existing traffic but all the traffic from
Baldia Town can also be facilitated with this bridge and U-Turn between A.O. Clock Tower
and KDA Chowrangi can be closed.
3.4.2 KDA Roundabout
i. JICA Proposal
KDA Chowrangi is a non-signalized roundabout. Converting it to a signalized intersection like
Five Star Chowrangi is proposed. However, there is a concern to remove the monument in
the roundabout. There are three alternatives to introduce bus way to the roundabout to keep
the monument. First, the lanes of both sides of median will merge before crossing at the
roundabout, and then split at middle of the roundabout to avoid some important monument,
if necessary, and merge again before totally leaving the roundabout and after fully passing the
roundabout area, the lane will be separated again. Second, the bus way will pass straight
through the roundabout keeping the same distance between both lanes. The third alternative
is that the bus way will run along the fringe of the roundabout like the mixed traffic lanes, but
utilizing the outer parts of the roundabout so that width of the existing carriageway should
not be affected by the new bus way. Signalization is necessary for all alternatives.
Since there are dead spaces in case of the alternative 2 and 3, alternative 1 is recommended.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
3-5 September, 2014
Figure 3-2: Alternatives for Busway at Roundabouts (JICA)
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
Relocation of this monument may also be considered and in this case Alternative 2 can be
implemented.
3.4.3 Five Star Chowrangi
i. JICA Proposal
The separated lanes with the wide median will be merged in the intersection to enable
signaling control. Existing island in a circle shape at the middle of intersection should be
removed.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The JICA proposal is found feasible.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
3-6 September, 2014
3.4.4 Sakhi Hassan Chowrangi
i. JICA Proposal
This is a roundabout similar to KDA roundabout. It is proposed to convert this roundabout to
a signalized intersection like Five Star Chowrangi.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The JICA proposal is suitable.
3.4.5 U-Turn along Shahrah-e-Sher Shah Suri
i. JICA Proposal
U-turns along Shahrah-e-Sher Shah Suri cannot be closed and should be retained. Traffic
signals will be installed at all U-turns to separate BRT vehicles from the U-turn vehicles.
Since the bus way will pass in the middle of the road, provision of storage lanes along U-turn
section is necessary so that the vehicles taking U-turn have proper space to wait, particularly
when BRT vehicles are passing in this area. The storage lanes should be properly painted
with marking on a specified location so as to give warning to the other vehicles approaching
the storage lane and to the vehicles travelling in the same direction.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The JICA proposal is acceptable for the above discussed U-Turn.
3.4.6 Intersections along Shahrah-e-Usman
i. JICA Proposal
There are power pylons along the median of Shahrah-e-Usman, which makes it difficult to use
the median space for BRT system. Due to this, it is necessary to use existing lanes located
outside the median for the bus way. However, the width of mixed traffic lanes will reduce to
less than 10m at some sections. It is recommended to widen arriageway along the road by
utilizing some parts of the existing frontage road or even sidewalk on both sides, if necessary.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
3-7 September, 2014
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The JICA proposal is acceptable.
3.4.7 Nagan Chowrangi
i. JICA Proposal
Flyovers provide right-turn movements from Shahrah-e-Sher Shah Suri to Rashid Minhas
Road and from Rashid Minhas Road to Shahrah-e-Usman. There are two alternatives for the
location of the bus way in relation to the flyover ramp. The first alternative is that the bus
way is separated into both sides of flyover to the south of Nagan Chowrangi. This will cause
interruption between BRT vehicles going to Nagan Chowrangi at-grade and mixed lane traffic
going to the flyover. Signaling control will be necessary for the first alternative. Moreover,
the frontage road should be used to provide space for mixed traffic lane. The second
alternative is that the bus way will run east side of the flyover. In this case, the entire median
space should be used for bus way. The second alternative was selected for the plan because
the negative impacts on traffic is smaller than that of first one.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The JICA proposal is feasible.
3.4.8 Powerhouse Roundabout
i. JICA Proposal
The bus way is planned to pass straight through Powerhouse Roundabout as separated lanes
due to existing electric tower in the middle of the existing Central Island.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The JICA proposal is acceptable.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
3-8 September, 2014
3.4.9 Surjani Chowrangi
i. JICA Proposal
This roundabout should be converted to a signalized intersection.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The JICA proposal is acceptable.
3.4.10 U-turn along Shahrah-e-Usman
i. JICA Proposal
All U-turns along this section are proposed to be closed due to narrow width of the road
carriage way. Instead, intermediate T-intersections should be converted to 4-leg signalized
intersections to provide access to both sides of the road except for the intersection of
Shahrah-e-Usman and 2200 Road (old U.P More Roundabout) where a power pylon stands in
the center of the intersection.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The JICA proposal is acceptable.
3.4.11 Access to BRT Depot
i. JICA Proposal
The bus way for the depot access will be in combined lane as same as that of the beginning
point. It will be separated only by chatter bar and pavement marking.
ii. NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The JICA proposal is feasible.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
4-1 September, 2014
4 Selection of Vehicles
4.1 JICA Proposal
Proposed vehicle type is the standard bus of 12m length, platform-level boarding type high-
floor bus with floor height of 1,000-1,100mm. Two doorways which have 1,100mm width
and bridge plate are placed on the right-hand side. Propulsion system is CNG engine. Car
interior of bus is divided into the ladies section on front side, and gentlemen section in rear
side, separated by a transparent partition, and the seats, a doorway and the wheelchair
position are allocated in each section.
Figure 4-1: Proposed Vehicle as per JICA Study
Vehicle specifications Item
Dimension Length: 11.0-12.0m
Width: Maximum 2.5m
Vehicle capacity: More than 80 passengers
Floor height: 1000mm- 1100mm
Fuel type: CNG
Door arrangement: 2 doorway with width 1100mm
Air conditioner: Not equipped
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
4-2 September, 2014
4.2 NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
4.2.1 Type of Bus
JICA has proposed standard bus for the Green Line BRT running in convey of three buses.
JICA has considered the future demand of year 2030 but the trend of conversion from
residential areas to commercial areas will increase ridership significantly and a large number
of standard buses will be required to meet the future demand of Green Line. These large
number of buses may lead the Green Line BRT system towards congestion.
In light of the above, it is suggested that articulated bus is more suitable than standard buses
due to its large capacity although articulated buses are not assembled / manufactured in
Pakistan and will need to be imported. We understand that by using articulated buses in
place of standard buses, as proposed by JICA, the fare may be increased and the proper
operation and maintenance of these imported buses would need to be ensured before
selecting the articulated buses.
Furthermore the Blue Line BRT (convertible to MRT in the future), which is also under
consideration as a separate project, is also adopting articulated buses. The Green Line BRT
and Blue Line BRT will use the same corridor from Municipal Park to Gurumandir in the
future. Adopting the articulated buses for Green line BRT system will facilitate the integration
of the Green Line and Blue Line systems between Municipal Park and Gurumandir.
Figure 4-2: Typical Articulated Bus
4.2.2 Air-conditioned & Non-Air-conditioned Buses
Non air-conditioned buses are proposed in JICA study, however, due to hot and humid
environment of Karachi air-conditioned busses for BRT may be considered, as it will have
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
4-3 September, 2014
cost implications which can be further evaluated during the preparation of financing plan of
the project. Air-conditioned busses will also provide better service to passengers in an
improved travel condition. These busses are expected to run on full capacity and therefore to
provide better environment, air-conditioned buses are recommended.
4.2.3 Fuel Selection
JICA has proposed CNG buses for Green Line BRT. CNG is the most economical fuel available
but use of CNG as fuel has many drawbacks e.g., intermittent availability of CNG, frequency of
refueling is much more as compared to other fuels, pressure at several CNG stations is lower
than 200 bars and fuel dispensing takes longer time. Details of these drawbacks are discussed
below:
Due to acute shortage of natural gas in Pakistan, availability of CNG has become
unreliable. Nowadays availability of CNG is limited to alternate days and unless
special provisions are made to ensure continuous availability of CNG to the proposed
buses, its use cannot be suggested.
Fuel dispensing time of CNG is not only longer as compared to diesel but the reduced
pressure at several stations will aggravate the problem to greater extent.
To mitigate the above problems of availability of CNG, a dedicated facility may be developed
to exclusively supply CNG to Green Line BRT buses without interruption.
In case the above arrangement could not be feasible then only diesel may be used as an
alternate fuel though it is expensive than CNG and causes more pollution. When diesel oil
burns in engine, sulphur contained in diesel oil is changed to the particulate matter, and is
discharged as black smoke causing pollution of the environment. It is therefore suggested
that before selecting diesel as fuel it must be ensured that all the buses will comply at least
Euro-III specifications. The cost and other related factors must also be reviewed before
selecting the type of fuel. Time required for refueling should also be considered before
making any decision regarding fuel.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
5-1 September, 2014
5 Green Line BRT Stations
5.1 JICA Proposal
Stations for BRT will be located in the center of road in conformity with the dedicated bus
way location. The passengers’ access to the BRT station will be through pedestrian bridges in
order to avoid traffic accidents.
Fare collection should be made when passenger enters into the station in order to maintain
operation speed and time as well as uniform revenue management.
Due to limitation of ROW, it is not realistic to provide passing lanes. Instead, three slots for
boarding and alighting are proposed to apply convoy operation, so that two or more buses
can be operated in a group for arrival and departure at the same time.
Figure 5-1: BRT Station as per JICA study
5.2 NESPAK’s Comments and Suggestions
The locations and numbers of stations on Green Line BRT route proposed by JICA are
acceptable. Station layout recommended by JICA is not suitable for Green Line BRT because
these have been designed on basis of standard bus, whereas, NESPAK suggested to use
articulated buses due to potential increase in ridership in the future as the north area gets
populated and due to land restructuring.
Furthermore, the width of 4.0 meter as proposed by JICA for the station is insufficient and in
NESPAK’s opinion it should not be less than 5.0 meters to cater to the demand in the future.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
5-2 September, 2014
NESPAK also recommends provision of passing lane at stations to increase system capacity.
This will be beneficial to the public once more mass transit systems are constructed so that
express / direct services can be run between high demand stations. The layout of a typical
station for articulated buses with passing bays at each station is attached as Annexure – G.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
6-1 September, 2014
6 Preliminary Cost Estimates
6.1 JICA Proposal
The project cost estimate prepared by JICA consists of components such as construction cost,
consultant cost, and taxes etc. In addition to these items categorized as initial cost, operation
& management cost (O&M cost) were also considered as part of project cost that will
continuously accrue after the commencement of BRT operation.
6.1.1 Base Year
The base year of the project cost estimate was set in 2011. The cost information obtained
through the past projects in different years before 2011 were adjusted in the way price
escalation in each year is considered.
6.1.2 Currency
The project cost was estimated both in foreign and local currencies. For the civil works, all of
the costs were estimated in local currency (PKR), since there will be no special construction
method and techniques required, and all the materials, labor, equipment can be locally
procured. On the other hand, some of the equipment, devises and machineries, which are at
present not available in Pakistan and to be imported from foreign countries or to be
manufactured on Complete Knockdown (CKD) basis, were estimated in foreign currency
(Japanese Yen).
6.1.3 Exchange Rate
The official exchange rate of December, 2011 (average monthly rate), issued by State Bank of
Pakistan was used in the project cost estimate. The exchange rate between currencies used
was: US$ =PKR 89.340 and JPY = PKR 1.148.
6.1.4 Construction Cost
Construction cost was estimated based on the preliminary engineering design and has been
described Chapter 6 of JICA Feasibility report.
6.1.5 Procurement Cost
Bus cost, station facility cost, workshop equipment and products of operation system were
categorized as procurement cost. Since these items are not very common in Pakistan, it is
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
6-2 September, 2014
expected most of the products will be imported or locally assembled using imported parts
(for buses). For these reasons, estimation for procurement cost was made based on the
market price and cost information from similar projects in past, or if not, general cost data
from “BRT Bus Rapid Transit Planning Guide” (June, 2007) by ITDP were used.
6.1.6 Project Cost Estimate
The project cost estimate for the Green and Red lines was Rs. 21.147 billion.
6.2 NESPAK’s Review of Cost Estimate
The objective of the cost estimate is to obtain feasible options for the implementation of the
BRT project by evaluating feasibility of the project under various potential options, which
could be applied by changing conditions such as magnitude of equity investment, government
subsidy, fare levels and so on.
JICA’s cost estimate was based on at-grade corridor for Green Line BRT project, whereas
NESPAK has proposed approximately 6km of elevated section. The base year of the project
cost estimate is 2014. The basis of the cost estimate was current market prices. An escalation
of 10% per annum based on current market trends was used to escalate the project costs.
6.2.1 Infrastructure Cost Estimate
The infrastructure cost primarily consists of the cost of Construction which includes:
a) At-grade BRT Corridor Development
Stations and Allied facilities,
Pedestrian Bridges including elevators for the elderly and disabled,
Mini Barrier / Fence,
Road Pavement,
Covering of Drains, and
Culverts.
b) Elevated BRT Corridor Development
Elevated section along M.A. Jinnah Road (between Municipal Park and
Gurumandir),
Elevated section along Business Recorder Road (Gurumandir to Lasbela Bridge),
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
6-3 September, 2014
Elevated section along Nawab Siddique Ali Khan Road (Lasbela Bridge to Golimar
Chowrangi No. 1),Widening of Proposed Flyover at Gurumandir for Stacking of
Buses,
Elevated U-Turn at Municipal Park
Stations and allied facilities,
Road Pavement, and
Pedestrian Bridges including elevators for the elderly and disabled.
Other main components of infrastructure cost are:
Depot Civil Works,
Cost of Geotechnical Investigations,
Cost of EIA,
Cost for Detailed Designing,
Cost for Relocation of Utilities (if any),
Cost for Detailed Construction Supervision, and
Cost for Hiring Independent Engineer.
6.2.2 Revenue / ITS System Cost Estimate
The procurement of Revenue / ITS system is part of this project. The cost would include the
software, hardware, equipment / machines, fare collection gates, system, etc.
6.2.3 Bus Procurement Cost Estimate
The buses shall be procured as part of the project. As per JICA study, the requirement of
buses is 210 standard buses with 80 passenger capacity. The capacity of articulated buses is
160 passengers, which would require procurement of 105 buses within the first three years
of operations. The unit cost of each articulated bus is estimated at Rs. 30 million in current
prices including VAT and Custom Duty.
The total cost in year 2014 prices comes out as Rs. 19.893 billion. . The total escalation
adjusted cost comes out to be Rs. 23,242 billion. The summary of Cost Estimates for the three
components is given in Tables 6-1 thru 6.3.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
6-4 September, 2014
Table 6-1: Summary of Infrastructure Cost Estimate
S. No. INFRASTRUCTURE COST Cost (Rs.)
1 Total Construction Cost (Year 2014-15) 13,566,648,568
2 Design Cost (1% of Construction Cost) 135,666,486
3 Geotechnical Investigations 5,000,000
4 Environmental Impact Assessment 5,000,000
5 Detailed Supervision (2% of Construction Cost) 271,332,971
6 Independent Engineer (1% of Construction Cost) 135,666,486
7 Utility Relocation (Provisional sum) 500,000,000
Sub-total 14,619,314,511
8 Contingency (5%) 730,965,725.55
Total Cost (Infrastructure Design & Construction) (Year 2014-15) 15,350,280,237
Construction Cost Expense (12.5%) - (Year 2014-15) - No Escalation 1,918,785,030
Construction Cost Expense (50%) - (Year 2015-16) - Escalation Adjusted 8,442,654,130
Construction Cost Expense (37.5%) - (Year 2016-17) - Escalation Adjusted 6,965,189,657
Table 6-2: Summary of Revenue / ITS System Cost Estimate
S. No. FARE COLLECTION / ITS COST Cost (Rs.)
1 System Cost (Year 2014-15) 1,118,793,870
2 Design Cost (1% of System Cost) 11,187,939
3 Independent Engineer (1% of System Cost) 11,187,939
Sub-total 1,141,169,747
4 Contingency (5%) 57,058,487
Total Cost (ITS System Design & Installation Works) (Year 2014-15) 1,198,228,234
Revenue / ITS System Cost Expense (Year 2016-17) - Escalation Adjusted 1,449,856,163
Table 6-3: Summary of Articulated Buses Procurement Cost Estimate
S. No. VEHICLE PROCUREMENT COST Cost (Rs.)
1 Fleet Cost (105 buses in year 2014-15) 3,153,983,175
2 Independent Engineer (1% of Cost) 31,539,832
Sub-total 3,185,523,007
3 Contingency (5%) 159,276,150
Total Cost (Bus Procurement) (Year 2014-15) 3,344,799,157
Fleet Cost (35 buses in year 2016-17) - Escalation Adjusted 1,349,068,993
Fleet Cost (35 buses in year 2017-18) - Escalation Adjusted 1,483,975,893
Fleet Cost (35 buses in year 2018-19) - Escalation Adjusted 1,632,373,482
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
6-5 September, 2014
6.3 Infrastructure Maintenance Costs
Routine maintenance works need to be undertaken each year and constitute cyclic as well as
reactive works. The need of these works is dependent on environmental as well as traffic
effects. The annual cost of routine maintenance was taken as 1% of the infrastructure cost of
the project. The works will generally involve:
Repair of cracks / potholes,
Edge Repair,
Road sign maintenance,
Clearing drains and culverts,
Operations Office maintenance, and
Utility infrastructure / communications maintenance.
Periodic maintenance is planned to be undertaken at intervals of ten (10) years. These works
can take the form of preventive, resurfacing or overlay works and involve:
Overlays on Roads / Bridge Decks,
Replacement of Road traffic control devices, where required,
Replacement of expansion joints / bearing pads, where required, and
Utility infrastructure / communications up gradation, where required.
For the purpose of this analysis, condition responsive treatment rule is assumed whereby
work is triggered when condition reaches a critical threshold, known as an "intervention
level”. The cost of Periodic maintenance is taken as 8% of the infrastructure cost. It is
assumed that the periodic maintenance will be required thrice in the 30-year analysis period,
i.e. after every 10 years.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-1 September, 2014
7 Economic Analysis
The economic analysis appraises the project contribution to the social and economic welfare of the
city, region or country. It is made on behalf of the whole society (region or country). The objective
of the economic analysis is maximizing public benefits. Taxes, subsidies and interest payments are
excluded from economic analysis.
The BRT project will bring about positive benefits to Karachi, while it will consume national
resources to some extents. The project should be evaluated by comparing its economic benefit and
economic cost in view of the country’s economy.
The major economic benefits of the project are: (1) travel time savings, (2) vehicle operating cost
(VOC) savings, (3) reduction in vehicle emissions, and (4) indirect benefits such as comfortable ride
on modern air-conditioned buses from stressful minibuses and improvement of the city’s image.
The BRT Green line project involves negative benefits for car users from reduction in the number of
lanes in at-grade sections and transit priority signaling control at all intersections. The negative
benefits were deducted from travel time saving for the analysis.
7.1 JICA Proposal
JICA feasibility study calculated the economic benefits of the project which included the operations
also. The fare was proposed as flat fare of Rs. 20 per trip. Revenue from advertisements was
assumed as 5% of the total revenue.
It was assumed that the construction period is three years from 2017 and the service of BRT will
start in 2020. The cost allocation was based on the analysis of Chapter 10 of JICA feasibility report.
Table 8-4-15 shows the flow of benefit and cost.
Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) was calculated as 24.4%. Net present value (NPV) at 12%
discount rate was calculated as Rs. 8.4 billion. The result shows that this project would be
economically feasible.
7.2 NESPAK’s Review of Economic Analysis
JICA’s economic analysis included operations and maintenance of the BRT corridor. The scope of
this study only includes the procurement of Revenue / ITS system and buses along with
construction and maintenance of BRT infrastructure.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-2 September, 2014
Travel time savings and VOC savings were estimated as economic benefit of the project and
Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) was calculated based on the two. The indirect benefits
were not taken into account since it is difficult to estimate such benefits. The evaluation period will
be 30 years considering the project life of BRT Green line system.
Based on above, a “With” &“Without” analysis is the basis of economic evaluation for the project.
There are some measurable impacts of the BRT project such as reduction in total travel time,
reduction in vehicle operating costs, and reduction in vehicle emissions. The negative impact shall
be in at-grade sections where the BRT corridor will use existing traffic lanes.
The BRT system will provide several quantitative and qualitative impacts. The following
quantitative impacts are expected by the BRT project:
7.2.1 Quantitative Impacts
i. Traffic Impacts
The capacity of the proposed BRT system with articulated buses of 160 passengers is 29,400
without passing lane while passengers per hour per direction with a passing lane (assuming 25% of
the services will use direct / express service) is 34,500. This is equivalent to nearly 840 minibuses
(35 passengers per minibus) or 1,680 passenger car units (PCUs). In case that the capacity of a lane
of a road is less than 1,680 PCUs, converting the lane to the BRT lane will increase the road capacity.
Generally, the capacity of a lane is 2,200 PCUs if there is no intersection, and converting such lane to
the BRT lane will reduce the road capacity.
ii. Travel Time Reduction of Bus Passengers
Presently, the average speed of a minibus is approximately 17km/h in Karachi as per KTIP, 2030. It
is expected that the BRT system will be operated at an average speed of 25 km/h. This will reduce
the travel time of bus passengers.
iii. Reduction in Vehicle Operating Cost
Introduction of large buses for the BRT system will reduce the number of buses, which will save
fuel consumption and vehicle operating costs.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-3 September, 2014
iv. Environmental Impacts
As discussed in JICA Feasibility Report Section 8.2, the BRT system will improve environment.
7.2.2 Qualitative Impacts
The following qualitative impacts are expected by the BRT project, although measuring the impacts
in numeric units shall be difficult.
i. Improvement of City’s Image
Megacities in the world have introduced mass transit systems including BRT systems in recent
years, which have impressed the world that the cities are economically growing. Mass transit
system in these cities became a symbol of the steady growth of the city. BRT system with modern
type vehicles will improve the image of Karachi.
ii. Increase in Women’s Trips
Presently, the trip rate of women in Karachi is very low because of the social and cultural
background. However, poor transport system can also be attributed as one of the reasons. BRT
system will provide a safer transport system as compared to the existing minibuses. The project
will encourage women to make more trips to participate in social activities.
iii. Possible Crime Reduction
BRT system will ensure transparent fare collection by installing electronic ticket gates and
monitoring cameras to discourage free riders. Presence of cameras at major intersections and at
stations can help in reducing crime in the city. Lighting at stations and along the corridor will also
contribute to reducing crime at night time.
iv. Pedestrian Safety
Pedestrian bridges will be constructed to access BRT stations. People can use these bridges even if
they do not use intend to use BRT. The new pedestrian bridges will increase the number of crossing
points along the route, which will encourage people to use the bridges instead of crossing roads
against heavy traffic. It can expected that traffic accidents on roads involving crossing pedestrians
and cars will decrease.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-4 September, 2014
v. City Development
The BRT corridor will connect the north of the city to the center of the city (Saddar), thereby
inducing and promoting urban development to the north.
7.2.3 Project Cost
The project cost was estimated as Rs. 23,241.90 billion in total after impact of project cost
escalation up to the financial year 2018-19 (Section 6 of this report). In economic evaluations, price
escalation and transfer items such as tax and subsidy should be excluded. The project cost does not
include opportunity cost of carriageways and medians of roads which will be consumed for BRT
lanes.
The cost of carriageways is considered as negative benefit of road users due to reduction in travel
speed. Median spaces of roads are reserved for future development of infrastructure. However, it is
considered that the median spaces will remain in the future without producing economic benefits if
it is not used for BRT this time. Therefore, these costs can be excluded from the economic cost.
Shadow wage rate to adjust unskilled labor cost is not applied because unemployment rate of Sindh
is not so high (5.00% in urban area of Sindh, 2012-13 as compared to 6.2% for whole of Pakistan as
per Pakistan Bureau of Statistics) to consider the real cost of unskilled labors.
The economic cost of the initial investment (infrastructure construction and procurement of
Revenue / ITS system and buses) was estimated as Rs. 16,312.22 million as shown in Table 7-1.
7.2.4 Operation and Maintenance Cost (O&M)
In O&M costs, only infrastructure maintenance costs are included. Personnel cost, administrative
cost, and infrastructure maintenance cost are not considered as O&M cost for the economic analysis
since this is an infrastructure construction project. The annual maintenance cost for the
infrastructure was assumed as 1% of total infrastructure construction cost per year for routine
maintenance (JICA Feasibility Report).
The periodic maintenance cost (every 10 years) was assumed to be 8% of the construction cost.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-5 September, 2014
Table 7-1: Estimation of Economic Cost of Construction & Procurement
Item Rs.
Million
Total Construction Cost (2014/15) 15,350.28
Revenue / ITS System Cost (2014/15) 1,198.23
Bus Procurement Cost (2014/15) 3,344.80
Grand Total (Year 2014/15) 19,893.31
Expense (Escalation Adjusted)
Construction Cost Expense (12.5%) (Year 2014-15) - No Escalation
1,918.79
Construction Cost Expense (50%) (Year 2015-16) - Escalation Adjusted
8,442.65
Construction Cost Expense (37.5%) (Year 2016-17) - Escalation Adjusted
6,965.19
Revenue / ITS Cost (FY 2016-17) - Escalation Adjusted 1,449.86
Bus Procurement Cost (FY 2016-17) - 35 buses - Escalation Adjusted
1,349.07
Bus Procurement Cost (FY 2017-18) - 35 buses - Escalation Adjusted
1,483.98
Bus Procurement Cost (FY 2018-19) - 35 buses - Escalation Adjusted
1,632.37
Grand Total (Escalation Adjusted) (a) 23,241.90
VAT (17%) (b) 2,890.48
Custom Duty for the Transport of more than 10 persons (@20%)1 (c) 557.47
Import Duty on ITS Equipment (@12.5%)2 (d) 133.14
Price Escalation (Construction of Infrastructure & Procurement of buses / ITS equipment)
(e) 3,348.60
Economic Cost of Green Line System (a)-(b)-(c)-(d)-(e) 16,312.22
Note:
1) Pakistan Customs Tariff, 2014-15 (Section 8702.1010)
2) Pakistan Customs Tariff, 2014-15 (Section 87.15) varies between 1-25%. 12.5% taken as average
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-6 September, 2014
7.2.5 Vehicle Operating Costs
i. Components of Vehicle Operating Costs (VOC)
In usual economic evaluation of a transport project, VOC consists of 1) depreciation of vehicle, 2)
fuel consumption cost, 3) lubricant cost, 4) driver’s cost, 5) maintenance worker’s cost, 6) spare
tyre cost, and 7) spare parts cost. In addition, drivers and maintenance workers costs are
considered in O&M cost.
ii. Vehicle Operating Cost of Motorcycles
The shift from motorcycles to the BRT system will reduce the VOC of motorcycles. The major VOC of
a motorcycle is fuel consumption and capital cost. Fuel consumption rate was assumed as 40 km
per liter (JICA Feasibility Report). Petrol price is approximately Rs. 109 in current prices. The
economic cost of the fuel consumption of a motorcycle was calculated at Rs. 2.33 per km. The
capital cost per km was estimated at Rs. 2.00 per km based on the assumption that price of a
motorcycle was Rs. 100,000 and mileage life was 50,000 km. VOC was calculated at Rs. 4.33 per km.
iii. Vehicle Operating Cost of Private Cars
Vehicle Operating Cost savings of cars by shifting to the BRT system was estimated as same method
as that of motorcycles. VOC was estimated as Rs. 12.88 per km based on the assumption that: 1) fuel
consumption rate = 15 km per liter, 2) price = Rs. 1,000,000, and 3) car mileage life = 150,000 km.
iv. Vehicle Operating Cost of Public Buses
Fuel consumption rate of buses varies with size of buses, passenger loading, speed, acceleration etc.
The average fuel consumption rate of BRT buses was assumed as 2.9 km per liter based on
information from a bus manufacture in Karachi for standard bus as per JICA Feasibility Report. The
average fuel consumption rate of articulated buses based on international reviews is around 2.0 km
/ liter. The vehicle operating cost is taken as Rs. 50.9 per km as provided by KTIP, 2030 (Volume-1).
v. Vehicle Operating Cost Savings
JICA Feasibility study section 3.5.6 states that in the traffic assignment, it was assumed that
motorcycle and car passengers would not use feeder bus system. Therefore, only Origin-Destination
(OD) pairs which are directly connected by BRT links were assigned in case of motorcycle and car
passengers. The result shows that not all passengers will shift to BRT.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-7 September, 2014
The passenger shift from various modes i.e. public transport, motorcycle and private cars is
provided in Tables 3-5-7 and 3-5-8 of JICA Feasibility Report. The shift from public transport,
motorcycles and private cars for year 2010 is 4.20%, 1.40%, and 0.00% respectively. For the year
2020, the same are 53.41%, 8.38% and 4.73%. The various parameters used in the vehicle
operating cost calculations are shown in Table 7-2.
Table 7-2: VOC Cost Assumptions
Item Unit Mode of Transport
Source PT MC Car
Vehicle Operating Cost Rs. / Km 50.3 4.33 12.88 Calculated for MC & Car. Table 8-8 (JICA) for PT
Vehicle Operating Cost Rs. / Km / Pax
1.44 2.89 3.79 Calculation
Average Distance Traveled on BRT per Trip
KM 8.9 KTIP, 2030
Number of Days of Service per Year
Days 300 KTIP, 2030
Potential Diversion to BRT (2017)
% 4.20% 1.40% 0.00% JICA Feasibility Study, Page 3-39
Potential Diversion to BRT (2020)
% 53.41% 8.38% 4.73% JICA Feasibility Study, Page 3-39
Average Vehicle Occupancy Pax / Veh 35 1.5 3.4 JICA Feasibility Study page 8-12
Passengers (Daily) - 2017 without BRT
Pax 184880 89239 149721 JICA Feasibility Study, Page 3-39
Passengers (Daily) - 2020 without BRT
Pax 315798 144797 263257 JICA Feasibility Study, Page 3-39
Passengers (Daily) - 2017 Shift
% 404712
Passengers (Daily) - 2020 365376
Passengers (Daily) - 2030 640768
Yearly Increase in Traffic - (from 2020 onwards)
% 4.15% JICA, KTIP, 2030
The analysis of Yearly Estimation of Vehicle Operating Cost (VOC) Savings of Users is shown in
Table 7-3.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-8 September, 2014
Table 7-3: Yearly Estimation of Vehicle Operating Cost (VOC) Savings of Users
S. No.
Year
VOC Before BRT (Rs. Million per year)
VOC After BRT (Rs. Million per year)
Yearly VOC Savings
(PKR Millions)
Public Transport
MC Car Total Public
Transport MC Car Total
1 2016/17 177.35 171.91 378.52 727.78 169.91 169.51 378.52 717.93 9.86
2 2017/18 522.16 486.53 1139.75 2148.44 301.45 453.78 1097.82 1853.05 295.39
3 2018/19 866.97 801.15 1900.98 3569.10 432.99 738.05 1817.12 2988.16 580.93
4 2019/20 1211.77 1115.76 2662.22 4989.75 564.53 1022.32 2536.43 4123.28 866.47
5 2020/21 1262.06 1162.07 2772.70 5196.83 581.47 1052.99 2612.52 4246.98 949.85
6 2021/22 1314.44 1210.29 2887.77 5412.50 598.91 1084.58 2690.90 4374.39 1038.11
7 2022/23 1368.98 1260.52 3007.61 5637.11 616.88 1117.12 2771.62 4505.62 1131.49
8 2023/24 1425.80 1312.83 3132.42 5871.05 635.39 1150.63 2854.77 4640.79 1230.27
9 2024/25 1484.97 1367.32 3262.42 6114.70 654.45 1185.15 2940.41 4780.01 1334.69
10 2025/26 1546.59 1424.06 3397.81 6368.46 674.08 1220.70 3028.63 4923.41 1445.05
11 2026/27 1610.78 1483.16 3538.82 6632.75 694.31 1257.32 3119.49 5071.11 1561.64
12 2027/28 1677.63 1544.71 3685.68 6908.01 715.13 1295.04 3213.07 5223.25 1684.77
13 2028/29 1747.25 1608.81 3838.64 7194.70 736.59 1333.89 3309.46 5379.94 1814.75
14 2029/30 1819.76 1675.58 3997.94 7493.28 758.69 1373.91 3408.75 5541.34 1951.93
15 2030/31 1895.28 1745.12 4163.85 7804.25 781.45 1415.13 3511.01 5707.58 2096.66
16 2031/32 1973.93 1817.54 4336.65 8128.12 804.89 1457.58 3616.34 5878.81 2249.31
17 2032/33 2055.85 1892.97 4516.62 8465.44 829.04 1501.31 3724.83 6055.18 2410.26
18 2033/34 2141.17 1971.52 4704.06 8816.76 853.91 1546.35 3836.57 6236.83 2579.93
19 2034/35 2230.03 2053.34 4899.28 9182.65 879.53 1592.74 3951.67 6423.94 2758.72
20 2035/36 2322.57 2138.56 5102.60 9563.73 905.91 1640.52 4070.22 6616.65 2947.08
21 2036/37 2418.96 2227.31 5314.36 9960.63 933.09 1689.74 4192.33 6815.15 3145.47
22 2037/38 2519.35 2319.74 5534.91 10373.99 961.08 1740.43 4318.10 7019.61 3354.38
23 2038/39 2623.90 2416.01 5764.61 10804.51 989.91 1792.64 4447.64 7230.20 3574.32
24 2039/40 2732.79 2516.27 6003.84 11252.90 1019.61 1846.42 4581.07 7447.10 3805.80
25 2040/41 2846.20 2620.70 6253.00 11719.90 1050.20 1901.81 4718.50 7670.52 4049.38
26 2041/42 2964.32 2729.46 6512.50 12206.27 1081.71 1958.87 4860.06 7900.63 4305.64
27 2042/43 3087.34 2842.73 6782.76 12712.83 1114.16 2017.63 5005.86 8137.65 4575.18
28 2043/44 3215.46 2960.70 7064.25 13240.41 1147.58 2078.16 5156.03 8381.78 4858.64
29 2044/45 3348.90 3083.57 7357.41 13789.89 1182.01 2140.51 5310.71 8633.23 5156.66
30 2045/46 3487.88 3211.54 7662.75 14362.17 1217.47 2204.72 5470.04 8892.23 5469.94
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-9 September, 2014
7.2.6 Value of Time Cost for Users
Value of time (VOT) for motorcycle and bus passengers was estimated as Rs. 49.65 per hour, while
that of car passengers was Rs. 110 (Refer to VOL-1, Chapter 9 of JICA’s Karachi Transportation
Improvement Project (KTIP), 2030).
The average operating speed (km / hr) as provided by JICA for motorcycle, car and public transport
is 20, 30 and 15, respectively. This was used in the calculation for value of time savings.
The analysis of Yearly Estimation of Value of Time (VOT) Savings of Users is shown in Table 7-4.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-10 September, 2014
Table 7-4: Yearly Estimation of Value of Time (VOT) Savings of Users
S. No.
Year VOT Before BRT (Rs. Million per year)
VOT After BRT (Rs. Million per year)
Yearly VOT Savings
(PKR Millions)
Public Transport
MC Car Total Public
Transport MC Car Total
1 2016/17 408.48 591.50 366.44 1366.42 391.32 145.80 366.44 903.57 462.85
2 2017/18 1202.63 714.25 1103.39 3020.27 694.29 390.33 1062.80 2147.41 872.85
3 2018/19 1996.78 837.00 1840.34 4674.12 997.26 634.85 1759.15 3391.26 1282.86
4 2019/20 2790.93 959.75 2577.28 6327.97 1300.22 879.37 2455.51 4635.11 1692.86
5 2020/21 2906.75 999.58 2684.24 6590.58 1354.18 915.87 2557.41 4827.46 1763.11
6 2021/22 3027.38 1041.07 2795.64 6864.09 1410.38 953.88 2663.54 5027.80 1836.28
7 2022/23 3153.02 1084.27 2911.66 7148.95 1468.91 993.46 2774.08 5236.46 1912.49
8 2023/24 3283.87 1129.27 3032.49 7445.63 1529.87 1034.69 2889.21 5453.77 1991.86
9 2024/25 3420.15 1176.13 3158.34 7754.62 1593.36 1077.63 3009.11 5680.10 2074.52
10 2025/26 3562.09 1224.94 3289.41 8076.44 1659.49 1122.35 3133.99 5915.82 2160.61
11 2026/27 3709.91 1275.78 3425.92 8411.61 1728.36 1168.93 3264.05 6161.33 2250.28
12 2027/28 3863.87 1328.72 3568.10 8760.69 1800.08 1217.44 3399.50 6417.03 2343.66
13 2028/29 4024.23 1383.86 3716.17 9124.26 1874.79 1267.96 3540.58 6683.33 2440.93
14 2029/30 4191.23 1441.29 3870.39 9502.92 1952.59 1320.58 3687.52 6960.69 2542.23
15 2030/31 4365.17 1501.11 4031.02 9897.29 2033.62 1375.39 3840.55 7249.56 2647.73
16 2031/32 4546.32 1563.40 4198.30 10308.03 2118.02 1432.47 3999.93 7550.42 2757.61
17 2032/33 4734.99 1628.28 4372.53 10735.81 2205.91 1491.91 4165.93 7863.76 2872.05
18 2033/34 4931.50 1695.86 4553.99 11181.34 2297.46 1553.83 4338.82 8190.11 2991.24
19 2034/35 5136.15 1766.23 4742.98 11645.37 2392.81 1618.31 4518.88 8529.99 3115.38
20 2035/36 5349.30 1839.53 4939.82 12128.65 2492.11 1685.47 4706.41 8883.99 3244.66
21 2036/37 5571.30 1915.87 5144.82 12631.99 2595.53 1755.42 4901.73 9252.67 3379.32
22 2037/38 5802.51 1995.38 5358.33 13156.22 2703.24 1828.27 5105.15 9636.66 3519.56
23 2038/39 6043.31 2078.19 5580.70 13702.20 2815.43 1904.14 5317.01 10036.58 3665.62
24 2039/40 6294.11 2164.44 5812.30 14270.84 2932.27 1983.16 5537.67 10453.10 3817.74
25 2040/41 6555.31 2254.26 6053.51 14863.08 3053.96 2065.47 5767.48 10886.90 3976.18
26 2041/42 6827.36 2347.81 6304.73 15479.90 3180.70 2151.18 6006.83 11338.71 4141.19
27 2042/43 7110.70 2445.25 6566.38 16122.32 3312.70 2240.46 6256.11 11809.27 4313.05
28 2043/44 7405.79 2546.72 6838.88 16791.39 3450.17 2333.44 6515.74 12299.35 4492.04
29 2044/45 7713.13 2652.41 7122.69 17488.24 3593.35 2430.27 6786.15 12809.77 4678.46
30 2045/46 8033.23 2762.49 7418.29 18214.00 3742.48 2531.13 7067.77 13341.38 4872.62
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-11 September, 2014
7.2.7 Benefit and Cost Flow
It was assumed that the construction period is two (2) years between April 2015 and March 2017
and the service of BRT will start in the April 2017. The cost allocation was based on analysis in
Section 6.
The following tables show the flow of benefit and cost. As per JICA Feasibility Study, the master plan
network was assumed for the estimation of benefits and cost in 2030. Since the difference of
benefits and costs between 2020 and 2030 was small and there would be uncertainness about the
master plan project, these values were fixed at the same values in 2020.
Economic Internal Rate of Return (EIRR) was calculated as 15.05%. Net present value (NPV) at
10% discount rate was calculated as Rs. 4,829.34 million. The benefit-cost ratio (BCR) is calculated
as 1.38. The result shows that this project would be economically feasible.
The analysis of Cash Flows and the calculation of IRR, B/C and Net Present Value (NPV) of the
project are shown in Table 7-5.
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-12 September, 2014
Table 7-5: Cash Flow Analysis
FY
Yearly Costs (Rs. Millions)
Yearly Benefits (Rs. Millions)
Yearly Cash Flow (Rs. Millions)
Economic Indicators
Capital Routine
Maintenance Periodic
Maintenance Total Cash
Outflow VOC
Savings VOT
Savings Total Cash
Inflow BCR EIRR
NPV (Rs. Million)
2014/15 1639.99 1639.99 0.00 -1639.99
1.38 15.05% 4,829.34
2015/16 6559.95 6559.95 0.00 -6559.95
2016/17 6578.06 6578.06 0.00 -6578.06
2017/18 767.11 131.20 898.31 9.86 462.85 472.71 -425.61
2018/19 767.11 131.20 898.31 295.39 872.85 1168.25 269.94
2019/20 131.20 131.20 580.93 1282.86 1863.79 1732.59
2020/21 131.20 131.20 866.47 1692.86 2559.33 2428.13
2021/22 131.20 131.20 949.85 1763.11 2712.96 2581.76
2022/23 131.20 131.20 1038.11 1836.28 2874.39 2743.19
2023/24 131.20 131.20 1131.49 1912.49 3043.98 2912.79
2024/25 131.20 131.20 1230.27 1991.86 3222.12 3090.93
2025/26 131.20 131.20 1334.69 2074.52 3409.21 3278.01
2026/27 1049.59 1049.59 1445.05 2160.61 3605.66 2556.07
2027/28 131.20 131.20 1561.64 2250.28 3811.92 3680.72
2028/29 131.20 131.20 1684.77 2343.66 4028.43 3897.23
2029/30 131.20 131.20 1814.75 2440.93 4255.68 4124.48
2030/31 131.20 131.20 1951.93 2542.23 4494.16 4362.96
2031/32 131.20 131.20 2096.66 2647.73 4744.39 4613.19
2032/33 131.20 131.20 2249.31 2757.61 5006.92 4875.72
2033/34 131.20 131.20 2410.26 2872.05 5282.31 5151.12
2034/35 131.20 131.20 2579.93 2991.24 5571.16 5439.97
2035/36 131.20 131.20 2758.72 3115.38 5874.09 5742.89
2036/37 1049.59 1049.59 2947.08 3244.66 6191.74 5142.15
2037/38 131.20 131.20 3145.47 3379.32 6524.79 6393.59
2038/39 131.20 131.20 3354.38 3519.56 6873.94 6742.74
2039/40 131.20 131.20 3574.32 3665.62 7239.94 7108.74
2040/41 131.20 131.20 3805.80 3817.74 7623.54 7492.34
2041/42 131.20 131.20 4049.38 3976.18 8025.56 7894.36
2042/43 131.20 131.20 4305.64 4141.19 8446.83 8315.63
2043/44 131.20 131.20 4575.18 4313.05 8888.23 8757.03
2044/45 131.20 131.20 4858.64 4492.04 9350.68 9219.48
2045/46 131.20 131.20 5156.66 4678.46 9835.12 9703.92
2046/47 1049.59 1049.59 5469.94 4872.62 10342.56 9292.97
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
7-13 September, 2014
7.2.8 Sensitivity Analysis
To evaluate the calculated EIRR in view of uncertainty of benefit and cost, a sensitivity analysis was
conducted by changing input values such as cost and benefit. Table 7-6 shows the result.
The result shows that the project will be economically feasible even if the cost is high by 10% or the
benefit is low by 10%.
Even in the case that the cost is 10% high and benefit is 10% low, EIRR will be still high at 13.02%,
which is higher than the cost of capital. This means that the project feasibility would be stable
enough against cost and benefit risks.
Table 7-6: Sensitivity Analysis
Case Base +10% in Cost -10% in Benefits +10% in Costs and -
10% in Benefits
EIRR 15.05% 14.07% 13.96% 13.02%
NPV (Rs. Million) 4,829.34 3,494.24 3,011.30 1,676.20
BCR 1.38 1.25 1.24 1.13
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
September, 2014
ANNEXURE
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
September, 2014
ANNEXURE – A
BRT ROUTE PROPOSED IN JICA FEASIBILITY STUDY
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
September, 2014
ANNEXURE – B
BRT CORRIDOR
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
September, 2014
ANNEXURE – C
BRT AT-GRADE / ELEVATED SECTIONS PROPOSED BY NESPAK
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
September, 2014
ANNEXURE – D
TYPICAL CROSS-SECTIONS PROPOSED BY NESPAK
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
September, 2014
ANNEXURE – E
ELEVATED ROTARY AT MUNICIPAL PARK
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
September, 2014
ANNEXURE – F
GREEN LINE AND BLUE LINE CORRIDOR MERGING AT GURUMANDIR
Bus Rapid Transit System (BRTS) – Green Line Review of Green Line Route of Bus Rapid Transit
September, 2014
ANNEXURE – G
TYPICAL BRT STATION LAYOUT