contentsurbantransport.kar.gov.in/bangalore_crs_final_report.pdfimplementation of commuter rail...

Implementation of Commuter Rail System for Bangalore Table of Contents

DULT Government of Karnataka i RITES

Contents

1 Prologue ................................................................................... 1

2 City Development Plans and Transport Plans ............................. 5

3 Commuter Rail System and its importance for Bangalore ......... 16

4 Rail system: Integrates City Core and Suburbs ........................ 24

5 Demand Supply Assessment ................................................... 33

6 CRS Implementation: Infrastructure Development .................. 45

7 Land – The Game Changer ....................................................... 90

8 Cost Estimates and Phasing of Investments ............................. 99

9 Return on Investment ........................................................... 116

10 Institutional Arrangements & Financing ................................ 125

11 Recommendations and Roadmap further .............................. 142


DULT Government of Karnataka ii RITES

Detailed Contents

1 Prologue ................................................................................... 1

1.1 Back Drop .......................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Terms of Reference ............................................................................................................ 3

1.3 Approach and methodology adopted for this study ............................................................ 4

2 City Development Plans and Transport Plans ............................. 5

2.1 City Development plans ..................................................................................................... 5

2.2 Master plans / Development Plans/ Structure Plans for BMR .............................................. 6

2.3 BMR Revised Structure Plan (RSP), 2031 ............................................................................. 7

2.4 Population Projections and allocation in BMR RSP 2031 ................................................... 10

2.5 Existing Travel Patterns.................................................................................................... 11

2.6 Appraisal of city transport plans....................................................................................... 12

2.7 Wilbur Smith Associates Plans for the BMR ...................................................................... 12

2.8 Where is plan for Commuter Rail? .................................................................................... 13

2.9 Costs of Overlap with CRS ................................................................................................ 14

3 Commuter Rail System and its importance for Bangalore ......... 16

3.1 Fundamental Questions ................................................................................................... 16

3.2 Leveraging the Strength of Indian Railways ...................................................................... 16

3.3 Potential in terms of Capacity .......................................................................................... 17

3.3.1 Capacity Assessment: Metro Vs CRS ................................................................................. 18

3.4 Potential in terms of Cheapest Alternative ....................................................................... 20

3.4.1 Cost Assessment: Metro Vs CRS ....................................................................................... 21

3.5 Potential to reach BMR .................................................................................................... 21

3.6 Potential in terms of Existing Backbone ............................................................................ 23

3.7 Comments and Suggestions ............................................................................................. 23

4 Rail system: Integrates City Core and Suburbs ........................ 24

4.1 The Reality....................................................................................................................... 24

4.2 Can CRS reach City Core and Sub-urbs? ............................................................................ 24

4.3 Extent of Commuter Rail System ...................................................................................... 24

4.4 IR Network overlap with other modes .............................................................................. 25


DULT Government of Karnataka iii RITES

4.5 Reverse Engineering......................................................................................................... 27

4.6 Locating Commuter Rail Terminals: Enter City Core or Terminate at Outskirts ................... 28

4.6.1 Commuter Needs ............................................................................................................ 28

4.6.1.1 Passenger Travel Patterns ................................................................................................ 29

4.6.1.2 Provision of alternate Public Transport ............................................................................ 30

4.6.1.3 Impact of forced transfers on service patronage .............................................................. 30

4.6.1.4 Development of BMR ...................................................................................................... 30

4.6.1.5 Indian Railways Considerations ........................................................................................ 31

4.6.2 RITES Recommends ......................................................................................................... 31

4.7 Modal Transits ................................................................................................................. 31

4.8 Conclusions...................................................................................................................... 32

5 Demand Supply Assessment ................................................... 33

5.1 Rail Network is to be shared for 3 types of traffic ............................................................. 33

5.2 Demand for urban and suburban Commuters ................................................................... 33

5.2.1 Macro estimates of trips by commuter rail in BMR ........................................................... 33

5.2.2 Assumptions for Estimating Population in CRS influence Zone in BMR .............................. 34

5.2.3 Assumption for Estimating the CRS Commuters demand .................................................. 36

5.2.4 Suburban Demand in 3 scenarios ..................................................................................... 38

5.3 Urban and suburban rail services – Present supply position .............................................. 40

5.4 Demand for Non-suburban Trains .................................................................................... 40

5.5 Demand for Freight Services ............................................................................................ 41

5.6 All three streams of demand put together ........................................................................ 41

5.7 How realistic is the demand forecast? .............................................................................. 42

5.8 Bridging Suburban Demand - Supply gap.......................................................................... 43

6 CRS Implementation: Infrastructure Development .................. 45

6.1 Backdrop ......................................................................................................................... 45

6.2 CRS: Need for Integrated Assessment ............................................................................... 45

6.3 Terminal Strategies .......................................................................................................... 46

6.3.1 Bangalore Terminal (SBC)................................................................................................. 46

6.3.1.1 Over View ........................................................................................................................ 46

6.3.1.2 Platforms: ........................................................................................................................ 47

6.3.1.3 Lie-Overs and Engine Reversals ........................................................................................ 48

6.3.1.4 Lengths of various Lines: The Operational constraints ...................................................... 50

6.3.1.5 Interconnectivity of Lines ................................................................................................. 51

6.3.1.6 Yard Speeds ..................................................................................................................... 53

6.3.2 Yesvantpur Terminal ........................................................................................................ 54

6.3.3 Additional Terminals ........................................................................................................ 55

6.3.4 Binny Mill Land Terminal: An extension to SBC terminal ................................................... 56

6.3.5 Baiyyappanahalli North: The Maintenance Terminal ........................................................ 57


DULT Government of Karnataka iv RITES

6.3.5.1 Advantage and Ease of Construction ................................................................................ 57

6.3.5.2 BYPLN needs to be a coaching terminal or maintenance terminal? ................................... 58

6.3.6 EMU Terminal.................................................................................................................. 59

6.3.7 Extension of Trains: Multi Terminals on MYS section ........................................................ 61

6.3.8 Hejjala 4th Coaching Terminal ........................................................................................... 61

6.3.9 Freight Terminals ............................................................................................................. 62

6.4 Sectional Strategies ......................................................................................................... 63

6.4.1 Unidirectional Traffic in Mornings and Evenings ............................................................... 63

6.4.2 Criss-Cross movements at BYPL: Avoid by Flyovers ........................................................... 64

6.4.3 Criss-Cross Movements at YPR ......................................................................................... 67

6.4.4 Other Criss-Cross Movements .......................................................................................... 68

6.4.5 Automatic Signalling ........................................................................................................ 69

6.4.6 Speeds on Loop Lines ....................................................................................................... 70

6.4.7 Electrification and Doubling ............................................................................................. 70

6.4.8 Minimizing goods trains on commuter lines ..................................................................... 71

6.4.9 Level Crossings – The Speed Breakers of the System: ....................................................... 73

6.4.10 Quadrupling .................................................................................................................... 76

6.5 Station Strategies ............................................................................................................ 76

6.5.1 Additional Lines and other facilities at CRS Stations .......................................................... 76

6.5.2 Additional halts on CRS .................................................................................................... 76

6.6 Directional Strategies for Terminating Trains ................................................................... 78

6.7 Commuters Handling Strategies at Stations...................................................................... 79

6.8 Rakes for Commuter Trains .............................................................................................. 80

6.8.1 Types of Rakes ................................................................................................................. 80

6.8.2 Three Car Vs Four Car Rakes ............................................................................................ 81

6.8.3 Other features of Rakes ................................................................................................... 82

6.8.4 RITES recommendations on Rakes ................................................................................... 82

6.9 Train Operation Plan ........................................................................................................ 83

6.9.1 Parameters ...................................................................................................................... 83

6.9.2 Capacity and Traffic Mix................................................................................................... 83

6.9.3 Operations Plan ............................................................................................................... 84

6.9.4 Integrating Present and Future services ........................................................................... 85

6.9.5 Stabling of EMU and MEMU Rakes ................................................................................... 86

6.10 Enhancement – A continuous activity ............................................................................... 87

6.11 Airport Connectivity ......................................................................................................... 88

7 Land – The Game Changer ....................................................... 90

7.1 Land – The crucial issue.................................................................................................... 90

7.2 Land along the Lines ........................................................................................................ 90

7.3 Land for developing stations – specially new halts on the CRS ........................................... 90

7.4 Binny Mills Land at SBC yard ............................................................................................ 90

7.4.1 Scenario without Binny Mills Land ................................................................................... 91


DULT Government of Karnataka v RITES

7.4.2 Alternative solutions for Binny Mill land issue .................................................................. 92

7.4.3 Scenario with part Binny Mills Land ................................................................................. 93

7.5 Land for locating new terminal (4th

coaching terminal) in SBC-MYS section ....................... 94

7.6 Land for SBC-WFD quadrupling ........................................................................................ 94

7.7 Military Land at YPR ........................................................................................................ 95

7.8 Land for various ROBs/RUBs construction......................................................................... 95

7.9 Land for expansion of rail network to new geographical areas.......................................... 95

7.10 Land for Freight Terminals ............................................................................................... 95

7.11 Land for various proposals/measures suggested in this report .......................................... 96

7.12 Land Acquisition: The Strategy ......................................................................................... 96

7.13 Bangalore Master Plan: Land for Railway use ................................................................... 97

8 Cost Estimates and Phasing of Investments ............................. 99

8.1 Overall CRS implementation Scheme in a Nutshell ............................................................ 99

8.1.1 Structural Activities ......................................................................................................... 99

8.1.2 Allied Activities: ............................................................................................................... 99

8.2 Block Cost Estimates in a Nutshell .................................................................................... 99

8.3 Summary of various activities needed ............................................................................ 100

8.4 Selection of Rakes and Impact on costs .......................................................................... 103

8.5 Phasing Philosophy ........................................................................................................ 104

8.6 Phase 1A ....................................................................................................................... 105

8.7 Phase 1 .......................................................................................................................... 106

8.8 Phase 2 .......................................................................................................................... 108

8.9 Phase 3 .......................................................................................................................... 111

8.10 Time frame for various phases ....................................................................................... 112

8.11 Scenario at the end of phase 3 ....................................................................................... 113

8.12 Extension of CRS activity further ..................................................................................... 114

8.13 Care need to be exercised by S W Railway ...................................................................... 115

9 Return on Investment ........................................................... 116

9.1 Extra Revenues to GoK due to implementation of CRS .................................................... 116

9.2 Savings to GoK due to implementation of CRS ................................................................ 117

9.3 Financial Rate of Return ................................................................................................. 118

9.4 Economic Rate of Return ................................................................................................ 120

9.5 Fare Structure & Surcharge ............................................................................................ 121


DULT Government of Karnataka vi RITES

9.5.1 Fare Structure of Indian Railways ................................................................................... 121

9.5.2 Surcharge being levied in commuter rail systems of India............................................... 122

9.5.3 Surcharge for Bangalore CRS .......................................................................................... 123

10 Institutional Arrangements & Financing ................................ 125

10.1 Financing by Indian Railways – The Traditional Model .................................................... 125

10.2 Hyderabad – MMTS model ............................................................................................. 125

10.3 Mumbai – CIDCO Model ................................................................................................. 129

10.4 Mumbai - MRVC Model .................................................................................................. 130

10.5 Recommendations and Suggestions ............................................................................... 132

10.6 Special Purpose Vehicle .................................................................................................. 134

10.6.1 SPV Model ..................................................................................................................... 134

10.6.2 Debt and Equity ............................................................................................................. 135

10.6.3 Viability Gap Funding ..................................................................................................... 136

10.6.4 Stake Holders ................................................................................................................ 137

10.6.5 Projects Identification and Sanction ............................................................................... 138

10.6.6 Execution of the Projects and O&M ............................................................................... 139

10.6.7 Fare Structure and Sharing of Revenues ......................................................................... 139

10.6.8 Land, Air Space and Non Fare Revenues ......................................................................... 140

11 Recommendations and Roadmap further .............................. 142

11.1 Summing up .................................................................................................................. 142

11.2 Launching Physical Surveys ............................................................................................ 142

11.3 Proposal to GoI .............................................................................................................. 145


DULT Government of Karnataka vii RITES

Tables

Table: 1.1 Population of Bangalore Metropolitan Region ........................................................................ 1

Table: 1.2 Modal Splits Comparison with Mumbai .................................................................................. 2

Table: 1.3 Past studies on CRS - Bangalore ............................................................................................. 3

Table: 1.4 Terms of Reference ................................................................................................................ 3

Table: 2.1 Authorities functioning within BMR ....................................................................................... 5

Table: 2.2 Population projections and allocations ................................................................................. 11

Table: 2.3 Share of various modes of transport ...................................................................................... 12

Table: 2.4 Phasing of Investments (WSA recommendations) ................................................................. 13

Table: 2.5 Total investment program for long term scheme (WSA recommendations) ............................ 13

Table: 2.6 Phasing of total investments (WSA recommendations) ......................................................... 13

Table: 2.7 Corridors suggested by RITES (2011) .................................................................................. 14

Table: 2.8 Section overlap of other modes of transport with CRS .......................................................... 14

Table: 2.9 Value of Overlap .................................................................................................................. 15

Table: 3.1 Capacity comparison of different modes ............................................................................... 18

Table: 3.2 Average Trip Lengths of different modes .............................................................................. 22

Table: 4.1 CRS Network in Bangalore .................................................................................................. 25

Table: 4.2 Other modes of transport parallel to IR Network within 1 Km ............................................... 25



Table: 4.5 IR Network parallel to other modes of transport .................................................................... 26

Table: 4.6 Consultant suggestions for Hyderabad MMTS ...................................................................... 27

Table: 4.7 Existing travel pattern of Bangalore rail commuters .............................................................. 29

Table: 5.1 Population density in 2011 ................................................................................................... 35

Table: 5.2 Assumed decadal growth rate of population ......................................................................... 35

Table: 5.3 Split of each section district wise .......................................................................................... 35

Table: 5.4 Modal split of commuter traffic in Mumbai .......................................................................... 36

Table: 5.5 Per Capita Trip Rate ............................................................................................................. 36

Table: 5.6 Modal share Vs trip lengths .................................................................................................. 37

Table: 5.7 The three scenarios ............................................................................................................... 38

Table: 5.8 Assessed Commuter Rail Trips (Scenario: Low) ................................................................... 38

Table: 5.9 Assessed Commuter Rail Trips (Scenario: Medium) ............................................................. 39

Table: 5.10 Assessed Commuter Rail Trips (Scenario: High) ................................................................. 39

Table: 5.11 Suburban rail services – Supply position ............................................................................. 40

Table: 5.12 Historical trend of passenger growth ................................................................................... 41

Table: 5.13 Traffic Projections for various commuter system in India .................................................... 42

Table: 5.14 Assessment of additional services required to bridge demand supply gap ............................ 44

Table: 6.1 Major rail projects in Bangalore area in the past .................................................................... 45

Table: 6.2 Rakes lie over at SBC ........................................................................................................... 49

Table: 6.3 Lines length of SBC yard ..................................................................................................... 50

Table: 6.4 Interconnectivity of running lines at SBC ............................................................................. 51

Table: 6.5 Trains being terminated short of SBC ................................................................................... 52

Table: 6.6 Scenario of SBC yard after suggested remodelling ................................................................ 54

Table: 6.7 Likely scenario of BYPL (N) 3rd coaching terminal.............................................................. 58


DULT Government of Karnataka viii RITES

Table: 6.8 Criss-cross movements of trains in BYPL area...................................................................... 65

Table: 6.9 Criss-Cross movements of trains at YPR............................................................................... 67

Table: 6.10 Criss-Cross movements of trains after YNK-YPR doubling................................................. 67

Table: 6.11 Comparison of Automatic Signalling and Absolute Block System ....................................... 69

Table: 6.12 Electrification & Doubling projects .................................................................................... 71

Table: 6.13 Average spacing of Level Crossings in CRS area ................................................................ 73

Table: 6.14 Number of Level Crossings & TVUs in CRS area ............................................................... 73

Table: 6.15 ROBs sanctioned in CRS area ............................................................................................... 75

Table: 6.16 Spacing of stations in Mumbai Suburban Rail System .......................................................... 77

Table: 6.17 Directional Convenience of Terminals ................................................................................ 78

Table: 6.18 Comparison of Various types of rakes ................................................................................. 80

Table: 6.19 Typical Potential for headway of CRS Trains ...................................................................... 85

Table: 7.1 Scenarios Scenario with part Binny Mills Land ..................................................................... 94

Table: 8.1 Phase 1A in a Nutshell ....................................................................................................... 106

Table: 8.2 Block Cost estimates for Phase-1 ........................................................................................ 107

Table: 8.3 Services after Phase 1 ......................................................................................................... 108

Table: 8.4 Phase 1 in a Nutshell .......................................................................................................... 108

Table: 8.5 Block cost estimates for Phase-2 ......................................................................................... 110


Table: 8.7 Activities and Block cost estimates for Phase-3................................................................... 111


Table: 9.1 Urban transportation proposals parallel to CRS ................................................................... 117

Table: 9.2 Indian Railways earnings per vehicle Km ........................................................................... 119

Table: 9.3 Indian Railways O & M Profit/Loss .................................................................................... 120

Table: 9.4 Economic rate of return in terms of capacity enhancement .................................................. 120

Table: 9.5 Surcharge being levied in Mumbai ..................................................................................... 122

Table: 9.6 Surcharge being levied in Hyderabad MMTS ...................................................................... 122

Table: 9.7 Two Scenarios of level of surcharge for Bangalore CRS ..................................................... 123

Table: 10.1 Growth of Indian Railway Network .................................................................................. 125

Table: 10.2 Patronage of Hyderabad MMTS ....................................................................................... 126

Table: 10.3 Projects under MMTS Phase II ......................................................................................... 126


DULT Government of Karnataka ix RITES

Figures Figure: 2.1BBMP, BDA and BMR Boundaries ........................................................................................... 5

Figure: 2.2 LPAs in BMR .......................................................................................................................... 5

Figure: 2.3 Preferred Scenario Map......................................................................................................... 8

Figure: 2.4 Land utilisation zoning ........................................................................................................... 9

Figure: 2.5 Transport Network .............................................................................................................. 10

Figure: 6.1 Binny Mill land towards Mysore end .................................................................................... 48

Figure: 6.2 Connecting MYS line to grid one .......................................................................................... 53

Figure: 6.3 Utilisation of Binny Mill Land for Commuter terminal .......................................................... 56

Figure: 6.4 Baiyyappanahalli (North) maintenance terminal .................................................................. 58

Figure: 6.5 Hejjala 4th coaching terminal ............................................................................................... 62

Figure: 6.6 Flyovers at BYPL area ........................................................................................................... 66

Figure: 6.7 Connecting Dodballapur line with Chikballapur line ............................................................. 72

Figure: 6.8 EMU rake of MRVC .............................................................................................................. 83

Figure: 8.1 CRS Implementation Phases .............................................................................................. 108

Figure: 8.2 CRS Implementation Phases .............................................................................................. 111

Annexures Annexure: 1 Lie-Over at SBC yard........................................................................................................ 148

Annexure: 2 Criss-Cross movements that can be made seamless by Flyovers ...................................... 152

Annexure: 3 Additional Halts suggested by voluntary organisations .................................................... 153

Annexure: 4 Trains presently serving Bangalore commuters and enhancing their capacities ................ 156

Annexure: 5 Cost Estimates in a Nutshell ............................................................................................ 160

Annexure: 6 EMU Rakes requirement for New Services ....................................................................... 161

Annexure: 7 Hourly Distribution of total scheduled trains running in CRS network at present .............. 163

Annexure: 8 Hourly distribution of commuter trains running at present .............................................. 164

Annexure: 9 Hourly distribution of assessed potential for introducing additional services after proposed

investments ..................................................................................................................... 165

Annexure: 10 ROBs with TVUs more than 50000 ................................................................................. 167

Implementation of Commuter Rail System for Bangalore List of Abbreviations

DULT Government of Karnataka x RITES

List of Abbreviations BBMP Bruhat Bangalore Maha Palike

BCRC Bangalore Commuter Rail Corporation

BDA Bangalore Development Authority

BEML Bharath Earth Movers Limited

BIAL Bangalore International Airport Limited

BMR Bangalore Metro Railway

BMR RSP Bangalore Metro Railway Revised Structure Plan

BMRDA Bangalore Metro Regional Development Authority

BMTC Bangalore Metro Transport Corporation

CIDCO City and Industrial Development Corporation

CRS Commuter Rail System

DEMU Diesel Electrical Multiple Unit

EMU Electrical Multiple Unit

FOB Foot Over Bridge

GoAP Government of Andhra Pradesh

GoI Government of India

GoK Government of Karnataka

GoM Government of Maharashtra

GPS Global Positioning System

HMDA Hyderabad Metro Development Authority

IB Intermittent Block

ICF Integral Coach Factory

IR Indian Railways

KRCL Konkan Railway Corporation Limited

LCs Level Crossings

LPA Local Planning Authority

MEMU Mainline Electrical Multiple Unit

MMTS Multi Model Transport System

MoR Ministry of Railways

MoU Memorandum of Understanding

MRVC Mumbai Rail Vikas Corporation

NICE Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises

O&M Operations and Maintenance

ROB Road Over Bridge

RUB Road Under Bridge

SPV Special Purpose Vehicle

SWR South Western Railway

TVUs Train Vehicle Units

WSA Wilbur Smith Associates

Implementation of Commuter Rail System for Bangalore Alphabetical List of Stations

DULT Government of Karnataka xi RITES

Alphabetical List of Stations S. No Code Station Name S. No Code Station Name

1 AEK Anekal Road 32 KGI Kengeri

2 AVT Avatihalli H 33 KHLL Ketohalli H

3 BAND Banaswadi 34 KIAT Kyatsandra

4 BAW Chikbanavar 35 KJM Krishnarajapuram

5 BFW Byatrayanahalli 36 LOGH Lottegollahalli H

6 BID Bidadi 37 MAD Maddur

7 BLRR Belandur Road H 38 MDLL Muddalinganahalli H

8 BNC Bangalore Cantt 39 MLO Malur

9 BNCE Bangalore East 40 MWM Malleswaram

10 BNKH Bhairanayakanahallli H 41 MYA Mandya

11 BWT Bangarapet Jn 42 MZV Maralahalli

12 BYPL Baiyyappanahalli Jn 43 NDV Nidvanda

13 CBP Chikballapur 44 NDY Nandi

14 CPT Channapatna 45 NMGA Nelamangala

15 CRLM Karmelaram 46 NYH Nayandahalli

16 CSDR Channasandra 47 NZH Nidaghatta H

17 DBL Dodbele 48 ORH Oddarahalli

18 DBS Dobbspet H

49 RMG

M Ramanagaram

19 DBU Dodballapur 50 RNN Rajankunti

20 DHL Devenahalli 51 SBC Bangalore City Jn

21 DJL Dodjala H 52 SDVL Soldevanahalli H

22 DKN Devangonthi 53 SET Settihalli

23 GHL Gollahalli 54 SGT Satellite Goods Terminal

24 GNB Jnana Bharthi H 55 TCL Tyakal

25 HEB Hebbal 56 TK Tumkur

26 HHL Hirehalli 57 TLS Betthalsoor H

27 HJL Hejjala 58 VTE Venkatagiri Kote H

28 HLE Heelalige 59 WFD Whitefield

29 HNK Hanakere 60 YNK Yelahanka Jn

30 HSRA Hosur 61 YPR Yesvantpur Jn

31 KDGH Kodigehalli H

Implementation of Commuter Rail System for Bangalore Final Report (August 2012)

DULT Government of Karnataka 1 RITES

1 Prologue

1.1 Back Drop

Bangalore, the capital of south Indian state Karnataka is India‟s fifth largest and

a rapidly growing metropolis. It is known world over as India‟s Garden City and

Silicon Valley. What started as a pensioner‟s paradise in post independent

India transformed itself into a metropolis with presence of large public sector

companies and educational institutions. Emergence of IT sector however,

overshadowed other areas and metamorphosed the city into a global IT hub. It

continues to attract India‟s best and brightest human capital given its

undisputed status as the knowledge capital of India. In the last decade or so, a

genial small city, dotted with breathtakingly beautiful gardens and dominated by

large defence establishments and government funded labs transformed quickly

in to a teeming metropolis which struggled to cope with its explosive growth. Its

inadequate road infrastructure, exponential growth of personal vehicles due to

raise in income levels all have combined to make local commute a nightmare.

Bangalore Metropolitan Region is spread over 3 districts namely Bangalore,

Bangalore Rural and Ramanagara. Population of this region is:

Table: 1.1 Population of Bangalore Metropolitan Region

The urban transport requirements have been reviewed in a number of studies,

the prominent ones being, Wilbur Smith Associates (2011) and RITES (2011).

Wilbur Smith draft report observed per capita trip rate for Bangalore populace

as 1.28. Out of this, public transport is observed as 30%. That works out to

No District

Area

(Sq.

Km)

Population Decadal Growth

Rate (%) Density (per SqKm)

2001 2011?

(91-01) (01-11) 2001 2011

1 Bangalore 2174 6537124 9588910 35.09 46.68 2985 4378

2 Bangalore Rural 2295 850968 987257 18.60 16.02 380 441

3 Ramanagara 3556 1030546 1082739 7.84 5.06 288 303

Total → 8025 8418638 11658906 38.49

Source: http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/prov_data_products_karnatka.html

@

Projected Population by 2031 : 180 Lakhs

http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/prov_data_products_karnatka.html



about 4.5 million trips by public transport. BMTC daily ridership is about 4.5

million1. Ridership of metro is presently about 25000 and ridership of Railways

is about 150000. Thus, public transport commuting needs of Bangalore are met

virtually by BMTC alone as on today!

With the kind of traffic congestion in Bangalore city today, BMTC can hardly

increase its ridership any further (except on account of extensions to new

geographical areas). Metro and Monorail which are being considered seriously

by GOK are certainly going to provide some relief. But the relief is limited

because of their limited spread in the city. The growth of demand is so huge

that dependence on a particular mode of commuting will grossly under serve

the public.

Bangalore has not yet actively involved in tapping the huge potential of the

Railway system like in case of Mumbai. Mumbai‟s modal share of its public

transport can be seen as under:

Table: 1.2 Modal Splits Comparison with Mumbai

Mode Mumbai Bangalore

Share Share

Rail (including Metro) 46% 1.5%

Bus 34% 40.5%

Autos etc. 10% 12%

Personal Cars etc. 5% 36%

Walk, Cycle 5% 10%

Total 100% 100%

Bangalore (for that matter any growing urban agglomeration) should take

Mumbai as its role model and integrate the rail system into its commuter

system.

Towards this objective, many studies were conducted in the past as under:

1 source: http:// www.bmtcinfo.com/ site/ BSBmtc At Glance.jsp



Table: 1.3 Past studies on CRS - Bangalore

Sl.No Study Year Remarks

1 Study by Southern Railway 1983 Recommended 24 Km of metro, 3 commuter rail lines and 58 Km ring rail over 25 years period.

2 Comprehensive Traffic Study by RITES

1988 Suggested many improvements to roads & railways.

3 Committee appointed by GoK

1993 Reiterated Southern Railway recommendations of 1983.

4 Intermodal Survey for Commuter Rail in Bangalore

2002 Recommended to strengthen existing rail corridors in Bangalore City.

5 RITES survey for Local Trains (CTTP 2007)

2007 Recommended strengthening of existing Rail Corridors of Bangalore.

None of the above studies were comprehensive. The studies analysed the

system at macro level and did not lay stress on workable and implementation

aspects. There were no enough detailing to convince the IR. With the result, IR

did not agree the recommendations. The rail system in Bangalore did not

undergo any major revamp so far towards serving commuters despite many

studies since 1983. It has been growing at its natural pace which is not

targeted or intended for meeting urban transport needs.

Therefore, Commissioner of Directorate of Urban land Transport retained

RITES for quickly estimating the existing shortfall and the future requirement of

commuter rail services for Bangalore region and suggest suitable workable

model to implement CRS in Bangalore. Terms of reference of the study are:

1.2 Terms of Reference

Table: 1.4 Terms of Reference

No Description

1 Review City and Transport Plans

Review of city master plans and future projections of growth

Review of city transport plans

2 Assessment of current Rail traffic and projections for the next 20 years

Review the demands for long and medium distance trains

Assess the current freight traffic and potential for future freight traffic under different scenarios

Assess the future demand for each stream of traffic for the next 20 years

3 Assessment of Infrastructure requirements: Sectional and terminal

requirements

Assess the current capacity utilization over different sections

Review the current terminal availability and problems associated with the

terminal operations

Assess the future capacity needs for the terminals



No Description

Suggest suitable measures to enhance the terminal capacity

4 Suburban Rail traffic: Assessment of potential and evaluation of options

Assess the demand for suburban commuter trains in consultation with

various state government bodies and SWR

Projection of demand for the next 20 years

Evaluation of the services provided by SWR for suburban system

compared to alternate options for the government of Karnataka.

Assess the feasibility of providing services and the infrastructure

developments required to provide the services.

5 Identification of optimal infrastructure utilization

Assess the section capacity needs over different time periods by deploying

Line Capacity Simulator jointly developed by IIT Bombay and RITES Ltd.

Identify possible combination of train running on different sections and

identify suitable criterion for evaluating them

Assess the optimal combination for running trains by deploying the line

capacity simulator developed by IIT Bombay.

6 Infrastructure investment requirements

Provide a phased plan for an estimate of broad costs for developing the

infrastructure

7 Institutional Management

The Management, Operations and Maintenance of the Commuter Rail

System

Identification of fare structure

1.3 Approach and methodology adopted for this study

1. Data collection and interaction with officials of Government of

Karnataka (GoK) and S W Railway.

2. Estimating the demand for commuter services with specific reference

to rail services.

3. Analysing the S W Railway network critically to identify the capacity

constraints and make out appropriate proposals for capacity

enhancement to serve commuters.

4. Providing block cost estimates for various proposals.

5. Analysing the alternative options for GoK for bringing commuter Rail

System to Bangalore, suggesting implementation plans, phasing,

funding options and institutional arrangements.

As a number of base studies were completed earlier, present study has been

limited to analysis of the secondary data.



2 City Development Plans and Transport Plans

2.1 City Development plans

The Bangalore Metropolitan Region (BMR), the area of this study contains

within itself, different planning and development units such as the BBMP, BDA,

and many LPAs (Local Planning Areas).

Figure: 2.1BBMP, BDA and BMR Boundaries

Figure: 2.2 LPAs in BMR

Table: 2.1 Authorities functioning within BMR

No Authorities functioning within Bangalore Metropolitan Region [BMR] Area in

Sq. Km.

1 Bangalore Development Authority [BDA] (incl. of BBMP) 1219.50

2 Bangalore – Mysore Infrastructure Corridor Area Planning Authority

[BMICAPA] 426.24

3 Ramanagaram-Channapatna Urban Development Authority[RCIDA] 63.06

4 Anekal Planning Authority [APA] 402.30

5 Nelamangala Planning Authority [NPA] 735.00



No Authorities functioning within Bangalore Metropolitan Region [BMR] Area in

Sq. Km.

6 Magadi Planning Authority [MPA] 501.52

7 Hoskote Planning Authority [HPA] 535.00

8 Kanakapura Planning Authority [HPA] 412.78

9 Bangalore International Airport Area Planning Authority [BIAAPA] 792.00

10 Area Planning Zone-1 [APZ-1 ] (Excluding RDUDA & BMICAPA) 462.60

11 All Interstitial Zones in Bangalore Metropolitan Region [IZ’s BMR] 2455.00

Total 8005.00

2.2 Master plans / Development Plans/ Structure Plans for

BMR

Draft Report „Bangalore Metropolitan Region - Revised Structure Plan 2031

prepared in 2011by BMRDA (the „revised‟ is a reference to the BMR Structure

Plan, 2011 which was prepared in 1998 and approved in 2005 by the Govt. of

Karnataka.). In addition, the following plans were also formulated:

1. IMPs (Intermediate Master Plans) for horizon year 2012 for the six

LPAs (Local Planning Areas)

2. RMP (Revised Master Plan) 2015, Bangalore Development Authority,

2007 for the BDA Area

3. CDP (City Development Plan) for the BBMP in 2006

The Draft Report „Bangalore Metropolitan Region - Revised Structure Plan

2031‟ by BMRDA prepared in 2011 is the latest Plan - incorporating reviews of

the other plans. Unlike the other plans: it is a plan for the entire BMR Area.

Hence a review of this Structure Plan would be the most appropriate for

purposes of looking at the future projections of growth envisaged in the BMR

Area.



2.3 BMR Revised Structure Plan (RSP), 2031

In the introductory text, the BMR Revised Structure Plan (RSP), 2031 reviews

the other plans for the different planning and development units in the area and

concludes thus:

“An analysis of the various plans operational in this region reflects not only

contrary development strategies but also certain inherent contradictions, and a

lack of coordination and acceptance of the overall policy framework laid out by

the BMR SP (Structure Plan) 2011. Rationalizing these contradictions emerged

as the main objective of the BMR RSP 2031.”

After a detailed spatial analysis of the land capability, demographic capability,

transport accessibility, and industrial location, the following alternate

development scenarios in the BMR were identified:

Scenario 1: Sprawl (along the existing road corridors)

Scenario 2: Investment led (major work / employment and residential centres)

Scenario 3: Green Network (conserving the existing environmentally sensitive

areas)

Scenario 4: Cluster (dispersing and concentrating development away from the

central city)

The above four scenario maps are illustrated in the images shown. These are

followed by the map indicating the “preferred scenario” formulated in the RSP

2031, and which forms the basis for the proposed Structure Plan.



Figure: 2.3 Preferred Scenario Map

Based on this “preferred” scenario, proposed Land Utilization Zoning Plan is

also shown here. This shows the predominance of “green” zones and the

locations of growth clusters in the BMR. It will be observed that in locating the

growth clusters, the focus is on roads rather than rail. It is only by coincidence

that in two cases (the Mysore and Chikballapur corridors) the growth clusters

fall on the rail axis, because they are close to the roads in the area. Also the

proposed transport network that is supposed to support the land use zoning

corroborates this focus on road based development proposed in the BMR RSP,

2031.



Figure: 2.4 Land utilisation zoning



Figure: 2.5 Transport Network

2.4 Population Projections and allocation in BMR RSP 2031

Finally the land use zoning, transport plan and the growth clusters converge to

the population projections and allocations detailed in the BMR RSP, 2031.



The RSP discusses three alternate scenarios for the population allocation in the

BMR, with respect to the proportion of the population in the core and the rest of

BMR. These three scenarios are for the 75:25; 70:30; and 60:40 proportions of

population in the core and rest of BMR. The RSP states that the second

alternative that is 70:30 share is the preferred population allocation. This

particular table showing the population projections and allocation to different

areas within the BMR is reproduced here.

Table: 2.2 Population projections and allocations

2.5 Existing Travel Patterns

The Travel patterns of the city and the BMRDA region are analysed by various

bodies based on various reports and the latest is the one prepared by WSA

associates for the BMRDA. The share of various modes of transport is given in

the Table: 2.3.



Table: 2.3 Share of various modes of transport

S.No Travel Mode Share

1 Walk 34.0%

2 Bicycle 4.5%

3 Taxi 0.5%

4 Auto 4.6%

5 Maxi Cab 0.5%

6 Two Wheeler 21.4%

7 Car/Van 4.5%

8 Public Transport 30.0%

Total 100%

Source: WilburSmith Associates, Final Draft Report, CTTS for

Bangalore Metropolitan Region

2.6 Appraisal of city transport plans

Keeping the growing importance of the city, various projects were taken up the

by different development agencies. Among this the important projects under

execution is phase 1 of Bangalore metro project. In addition, the following

projects are under different stages of sanction:

Metro phase 2 including phase 1 extension

High speed rail link to airport

Different BRT corridors in the city

In addition, two master plans were prepared; one by RITES limited in 2011 and

the other by Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) in 2011. The RTIES report covers

only the Bangalore Development Authority area and that of WSA covers the

entire Bangalore Metropolitan Region (BMR). Since the CRS is in BMR, we

review the WSA plans in greater detail.

2.7 Wilbur Smith Associates Plans for the BMR

WSA envisaged projects worth Rs.73,000 crores spread over 21 years.



Table: 2.4 Phasing of Investments (WSA recommendations)

Term Phase-I Phase-II Phase-III Total

Short 66 0 0 66

Medium 1529 847 0 2376

Long 15880 29543 25368 70791

Total 17475 30390 25368 73233

Table: 2.5 Total investment program for long term scheme (WSA recommendations)

Item Unit

Assumed

Unit Rate

(Rs. In crores)

Quantity

Amount

(Rs. In crores)

Metro Km 250 95.7 23930

Mono Rail Km 150 213.1 31964

BRT /High Density Dedicated

Bus Km 15 393.315 5900

Bus Corridor Km 0.1 324.4 32.44

Road Up gradation Km/lane 1.5 341.25 1507.35

New Roads Km/lane 1.5 515.8 4642

Missing Links Km/lane 1.5 529.1 1587

Transfer Stations No. 25 17 425

Intermodal Transit Centers No. 45 15 675

Truck Terminals No. 10 8 80

Bus Terminals No. 4 12 48

Total→ 70791

Table: 2.6 Phasing of total investments (WSA recommendations)

Schemes Phase 1

(2010 – 2015)

Phase 2

(2016 – 2021)

Phase 3

(2022 – 2031) Total

Rs. In Crores

Total 17475 30390 25368 73233

% 24% 41% 35% 100%

2.8 Where is plan for Commuter Rail?

In a massive plan worth about Rs.73,000 Crores envisaged by WSA, commuter

rail system finds no place! Unfortunately, the report does not refer to the

commuter rail system at all. It focused only on other modes of transport. But



due to inherent advantages and large potential that has, rail system just cannot

be ignored by any urban/suburban transport system. Potential of rail system is

discussed in greater detail in subsequent chapters. The RITES report (2011)

covers commuter rail system and suggested to develop following corridors:

Table: 2.7 Corridors suggested by RITES (2011)

S.No Corridor Length Km Estimated Cost

(in Rs. Crores)

1 Kengeri – Ramanagaram 32.0 480

2 Baiyyappanahalli – Hosur 41.0 615

3 Yeshvantpur – Tumkur 64.0 960

4 Yelahanka – Dodballapur 24.0 360

Total 161.0 2415

Present study relooked the whole gambit of Rail Service in detail i.e. not only

doubling costs, but also terminal facilities, rolling stock procurement,

maintenance and provision of additional halts etc.

2.9 Costs of Overlap with CRS

Now, many other modes are being developed parallel to CRS network in

Bangalore.

Costs being incurred (or planning to incur) on other modes to replicate the

services that otherwise can be provided by Railways is assumed as

under:

– 80 % if the line has parallel alignment within 1km of CRS

– 60 % if the line has parallel alignment between 1 and 2 km of CRS

– 40 % if the line has parallel alignment between 2 and 3 km of CRS

Table: 2.8 Section overlap of other modes of transport with CRS

S.No

Less

than 1

Km

1 to

2

Kms

2 to 3

Kms

Value of Overlapping Section

0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3

80% 60% 40%

Metro Rail 29 49 55 5800 7350 5500

Mono Rail 14 23 23 1680 2070 1380

BRT 50 76 98 600 684 588

HSRL 7 11 26 1400 1650 2600

Total 100 159 202.00 9480 11754 10068



Table: 2.9 Value of Overlap

Value: Assumed by WilburSmith (in crores per Km)

Metro Rail 250

Mono Rail 150

BRT 15

HSRL 250

From the above, it can be seen that about Rs.10,000 crores is being spent (or

planning to spend) to replicate service which can be easily provided by rail

network.



3 Commuter Rail System and its importance for

Bangalore

3.1 Fundamental Questions

Development of CRS depends on two fundamental questions:

Can it work as high density urban transit?

Can it work as sub-urban commuter system?

In this chapter, these questions are addressed.

3.2 Leveraging the Strength of Indian Railways

Potential of conventional rail system especially in commuter context can be

better appreciated by the way the Mumbai Suburban rail is serving the public.

Mumbai runs trains at 2 to 3 minutes frequency. The Mumbai Sub-urban rail

system should be the bench mark for any commuter system in India.

Mumbai‟s state of running trains at 2 to 3 minutes frequency is evolved over a

period of time. Even today, the system is set to increase the capacity by

quadrupling, 5th line, 6th line etc. In fact, capacity enhancement of any system

needs to be a continuous process. As technology changes and as the thinking

process changes, more and more innovative solutions come up for increasing

the capacity and meeting the growing demand.

Indian Railways is a highly complex entity constituting various disciplines,

various departments and various technologies. For example, it has got

signalling systems ranging from conventional old mechanical type to

semiconductor based signalling systems. Recently, a system of controlling

signals from a lap top has also come up.

Any typical bureaucratic system is normally a vertical hierarchical system

causing delays in decision making. Indian Railways is bureaucratic horizontally

as well as vertically. This adds to the complexity of the system further.



Any capacity enhancements to the existing network become further more

complex because the capacity enhancement is to be effected with no

disturbance or least disturbance to the already running traffic.

It is this complexity that is making the modern infrastructure planners to go for

costly alternatives like metro rail, dedicated corridors etc. without fully exploring

the potential of existing rail network as already brought out in section 2.9.

Innovative methods of financing, execution, O&M, management etc. are being

explored for these costly alternatives but not for rail network.

Capacity Enhancement of rail network is by and large left solely to Indian

Railways. No great intelligence is required to say that IR alone just cannot fully

take up this job with its ever dwindling resources and complexity of its structure.

In fact, Indian Railways, the pride of the Nation runs un-interrupted services to

move more than 30 million passengers and about 3 million tons of freight

every day. It is an excellent rail operator and probably one of the world‟s best

systems to run such a massive network without any hitch. Disaster

management and crisis management systems of the Indian Railways are the

best India can ever think of. Very big bridges washed out during floods are

constructed in just a few hours or at the most a few days and such disasters are

hardly felt by the travelling public.

IR has been enhancing capacity continuously with its limited resources. But

such enhancement is very marginal and cannot match the ever growing

demand. If the inability of IR to enhance capacity is supplemented by other

means, IR‟s strengths can be well leveraged to cater to ever growing demand to

a very large extent at much lesser costs.

3.3 Potential in terms of Capacity

Capacity of rail system can be better appreciated by the following comparison

matrix:



Table: 3.1 Capacity comparison of different modes

Rail

(Double Line)

Metro

(Double Line)

BRT

(Bi-Directional)

Average Speed

(Kmph)

40 to 70

36 to 40@ 25 to 55 25 to 50

Maximum Peak

Throughput

(passengers/Hr)

60000 40000 20000

Average Cost per Km (Rs Crores)

15 250 14

Investment in Lakhs

of Rupees/Passenger

Km / Hr / Direction

0.03 0.61 0.07

Source : Draft final report Jun „2010 of M/s Wilbur Smith Associates on Comprehensive Traffic and

Transportation Study for Bangalore Metropolitan Region for BMRDA

@Indian Railways Year Book 10-11

It is assumed that surface rail will use existing right of way. Metro will use elevated right of way. BRT would

require a right of way of about 3 to 3.5 metre per lane.

The above table gives the case where the CRS system runs only sub-urban

trains. However, a normal CRS system has to allocate paths between different

types of trains. In this scenario, it is presented in subsequent paragraphs how

CRS capacity would compare with a metro in capacity and cost dimensions.

Metro is chosen for comparison as it has the second highest capacity and it is a

rail based system.

The present commuter rail system of Bangalore runs at average speed more or

less at its potential. But the present throughput is far below its potential (about

2000 per hour – Taking 1 train of about 10 coaches per hour and 200 passengers per coach) and can

be exploited fully to its potential to serve the public. Capacity is high mainly

because of the train length. Train length can go virtually up to 28 coaches

which is just not possible with Metro or any other mode.

3.3.1 Capacity Assessment: Metro Vs CRS

As CRS will share space with other types of trains, frequency of trains would

necessarily be lower than metro and thus most people assume that CRS will

have lesser capacity. However, conventional rail systems can be designed to

have the same capacity as metro systems being introduced in the country and,

they could still have scope for running other trains in the same system.



Capacity, defined as passenger through put is a product of length, width and

frequency of trains. Width of metro coaches is 2.88 metres against 3.66 metres

of an EMU rail coach making it 1.26 times wider. Thus, capacity is 26% more

on account of width alone.

Length of metro coaches is fixed as 6 coaches in all the metro systems being

built in the country. This limitation arises as elevated platforms are very costly

and the increase of coach lengths increases the cost of the system

disproportionately. However, on IR, as conventional trains run with 26 coaches,

many of the station‟s mainline platforms are designed to accommodate trains of

this length. In Mumbai suburban system, a historical legacy, progressively 12

coach trains have become the norm and a few services are run with 15 coaches

also. Currently, suburban trains in Mumbai, Chennai and Hyderabad are run in

9 car rakes. In new suburban systems, as stations and platforms can be

located relatively more flexibly compared to legacy systems, introduction of 15

coach trains would not be difficult. Thus, Capacity of a CRS train is 2.5 (15/6)

times of a metro train on account of number of coaches.

Thus the capacity of a CRS train would be:

1 CRS Train = 3.15 metro trains (2.5 *1.26)

Next is the frequency of trains. A typical metro system is designed to achieve a

peak frequency of 20 trains in hour. If a conventional train system can dedicate

6 train paths (20 ÷ 3.15) in an hour for commuter train, then the CRS will have

the same capacity as a metro train system.

As seen earlier, in Mumbai Suburban system, Western Railway runs suburban

or EMU trains with a 3 minute frequency and Central Railway with a 4 minute

frequency. Even if we assume conservative figure of 4 minutes of Central

Railway, to run 6 trains the total time taken up would be around 24 minutes in

an hour. This leaves a gap of 36 minutes (or 60% of the time) for running non

suburban (or conventional) trains or as spare to different exigencies. During the

off peak hours, the time available for non-suburban trains will be higher.



Thus, by using 40 % of the capacity, a CRS system of the same capacity as

compared to a metro system can be developed. However, such a proposition

needs quadrupling of railway lines.

To sum up, CRS can be designed such that

CRS = Metro + Freight Trains + Long Distance Trains

3.4 Potential in terms of Cheapest Alternative

WSA (Draft final report Jun „2010 of M/s Wilbur Smith Associates on Comprehensive Traffic and

Transportation Study for Bangalore Metropolitan Region for BMRDA) provides plans for

investment of Rs 73300 Crores in phases up to 2031 (which does not include

any investment on rail system). With just about 10% of such investment, rail

system probably can meet half of Bangalore‟s public transport commuter

demand.

With an Investment of about Rs 8000 to 9000 Cr:

𝑃𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑐𝑎𝑛 𝑏𝑒 ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑙𝑒𝑑 =25 x 440 x 15 x 200

30 x 2 = 2.2 Millions / day

Broad assumptions in the above calculation:

Costs are as per block cost estimates given in “Cost Estimates and

Phasing of Investments” chapter.

25 commuter trains per direction in the entire CRS network of about 440

Km.

Each train consists of 15 coaches with carrying capacity of 200 each.

Average lead of each passenger is : 30 Km.

Calculation is done for both directions (multiplied by 2).

The 2.2 million passengers capacity is about half of the present day public

transport commuter demand of 4.5 million trips per day.



In fact, the 25 trains per direction taken in above calculation can be increased

substantially with marginal additional investment. Train lengths also need not

be 15 cars. It can be even more in future.

Metro Rail costs about 12000 Cr for 42.3 Km to serve about 1 million

passengers per day (as per phase-I of Namma Metro). Investment per

passenger Km of rail will be much less than metro as seen above.

Thus, a CRS system for the same capacity as Metro (plus additional capacity

for long distance passenger trains and freight trains) can be developed at much

lesser cost than Metro.

This clearly shows that commuter rail is the most economical mode of public

transport and it needs to be made an integral component of any commuting

system.

3.4.1 Cost Assessment: Metro Vs CRS

Cost of construction of a metro system per kilometre is around Rs. 250 Crores

for an elevated system (as per WSA reports) and Rs. 350 – 400 Crores for an

underground system. Compared to this, upgrading a conventional rail system to

suburban needs would cost around Rs 15-20 crores per kilometre.

To summarise, investment on a CRS system is highly desirable and should be

done on priority as it would create value for the following reasons:

An investment of Rs 15-20 crores per kilometre on a CRS system would

create capacity equivalent to a metro system with an investment

requirement of Rs 250 crores per kilometre or more.

It would also help in running more number of non-suburban trains more

efficiently.

3.5 Potential to reach BMR

Due to continuous growth of economic activity, urban agglomerations get

overloaded with more population and more commuting. Urban planning should



have mechanism to disperse the ever growing population and commuting to

new and new geographical areas so that no location gets over dense beyond

manageable levels. Undoubtedly, the first step of such dispersion is

development of roads to new locations. Beyond certain trip lengths, road

services become impracticable because they take unacceptably high journey

times.

Namma Metro, Mono Rail, High Speed Rail to BIAL, rejuvenated BMTC

services etc. which are top priority agenda items of GoK‟s transport plan cannot

really address the key problem of commuters. A commuter should be able to

travel a distance of about 70 Km (or even 100 Km) in about an hour or so.

Then only growth centres like Hosur, Tumkur, Mandya, Bangarapet etc. get

developed fast and pressure on main hub Bangalore will be eased. The said

agenda items (Namma Metro, Mono Rail etc.) shall at the most give some relief

within the highly urbanized Bangalore city area leaving the larger commuter

problem unaddressed because trip lengths of Metro are much less than the

public needs.

Dispersion of urbanisation is a function of average trip length. The more the

average trip length, the more is dispersion of urbanisation. Average trip lengths

of different modes can be seen as under.

Table: 3.2 Average Trip Lengths of different modes

Mode Average Trip Length

(km) Source

BMTC 10.8 WBA report June 2010

Metro 6 to 7 BMRCL project report

IR

(Suburban network) 33.8 IR year book 2010-11

IR is able to disperse the commuter traffic much effectively as its average trip

length of suburban travel is 33.8 Km which is much higher than trip lengths

possible by any other mode. With increase in trip lengths only suburban areas

like Hosur etc. can be integrated with city core.



From the above, it can be seen that IR has got potential to bring up the average

trip length of Bangalore public transport system from the present 10.8 Km to as

high as 33.8 Km. Such dispersion by Metro or Monorail or BMTC are nearly

impossible because it is prohibitively expensive to extend Metro or Monorail to

cover more locations.

3.6 Potential in terms of Existing Backbone

A strong and established IR network backbone is already available. No

complicated modelling studies are required to fully exploit this network. The

existing network can be studied for its bottlenecks and can be enhanced

continuously to meet ever growing passenger demands. It is also easier to

extend the backbone further to new geographical areas in all directions and also

in the form of ring rail or so

3.7 Comments and Suggestions

From the above, it can be appreciated that IR has very huge potential:

To work as high density urban transit.

To work as suburban commuter system.

With such a huge potential and advantages associated with it, no commuter

system can be claimed to be “complete” or “satisfactory” without the appropriate

mix of commuter rail.

It is only the Mumbai (Chennai and Kolkata also to some extent) that have

tapped the potential to their maximum practicable levels and benefited

immensely. They have been still tapping the potential further. Hyderabad also

is now joining the league of coveted commuter rail systems of India with its

MMTS. Bangalore should now take a leap forward to exploit the Railway‟s

potential and integrate the rail system with the city‟s commuter system to satisfy

the public needs.



4 Rail system: Integrates City Core and Suburbs

4.1 The Reality

No single mode of commuting (say it rail or road or metro or mono rail or so)

can fully satisfy the commuting needs of any city. Bus, rail, metro, mono rail

etc. have got different applications associated with them. They are meant for

different sections of commuters and for different trip lengths. An optimal mix of

different modes of public transport is normally the strategy for any urban

transport planning.

4.2 Can CRS reach City Core and Sub-urbs?

As already discussed in Para 3.5, due to more trip lengths associated with it,

CRS can be designed to reach both city core and suburbs seamlessly. The city

has a network of about 440 Kms (brought out in next paragraph) serving the city

in 7 directions. It serves satellite towns of Mandya towards Mysore,

Dodballapur towards Hindupur, Chikballapur towards new Airport, Tumkur

towards Hubli, Bangarapet towards Jolarpettai, Hosur towards Salem and

Kunigal towards Hassan direction.

Creating metro network of this extent and reach would be a difficult proposition.

CRS will be only viable option to cover BMRDA area.

4.3 Extent of Commuter Rail System

From the trend of commuter ticket sales at various stations in and around

Bangalore, and from interaction with various officials of South Western Railway

and Government of Karnataka, IR network that can serve Bangalore commuters

is identified as under:



Table: 4.1 CRS Network in Bangalore

S.No From To Distance (Km)

1 Bangalore Mandya 92.88

2 Bangalore Yesvantpur 5.35

3 Yesvantpur Tumkur 64.00

4 Yesvantpur Yelahanka 12.45

5 Yelahanka Baiyyappanahalli 19.23

6 Yesvantpur Baiyyappanahalli 16.12

7 Yelahanka Dodballapur 20.72

8 Yelahanka Chikballapur 46.05

9 Baiyyappanahalli Hosur 48.59

10 Bangalore Bangarapet 70.21

11 Soldevanhalli Kunigal 45.2@

Total → 440.8

@This section is a part of Bangalore – Hasan new line under construction. Considering urbanisation in this area, this section is also considered for inclusion in CRS network.

4.4 IR Network overlap with other modes

This network is parallel to corridors of various other modes suggested (and

under consideration) as a part of comprehensive transport plan for Bangalore2

as under:

Table: 4.2 Other modes of transport parallel to IR Network within 1 Km

S.No From To Distance

(Km)

Within 1 Km from IR Network

BRT Mono

Rail

Bus

Corridor

High

Speed Rail

Link

Metro

Rail

Total

Overlap

(Km)

%

Overlap

1 SBC MYA 92.88 25.90

12.00 37.90 41%

2 SBC YPR 5.35

5.35 5.35 100%

3 YPR TK 64.00

0.00 0%

4 YPR YNK 12.45 3.64

3.00

6.64 53%

5 YNK BYPL 19.23

0.00 0%

6 YPR BYPL 16.12

7.39

5.40 12.79 79%

7 YNK DBU 20.72 20.31

20.31 98%

8 YNK CBP 46.05

4.30

4.30 9%

9 BYPL HSRA 48.59

6.68

6.68 14%

10 SBC BWT 70.21

6.33 6.33 9%

11 SVDL Kunigal 45.2

0.00 0%

Total→ 440.8

Total→ 100.30 23%

2 Draft final report Jun ‘2010 of M/s Wilbur Smith Associates on Comprehensive Traffic and Transportation Study for

Bangalore Metropolitan Region for BMRDA




S.No From To Km


BRT Mono

Rail

Bus

Corridor

High

Speed Rail

Link

Metro

Rail

Total

Overlap

(Km)

%

Overlap

1 SBC MYA 92.88 36.63

12.20 48.83 53%

2 SBC YPR 5.35

5.35 5.35 100%

3 YPR TK 64.00

3.50 3.50 5%

4 YPR YNK 12.45 3.64

5.00

8.64 69%

5 YNK BYPL 19.23 6.00

6.00 31%

6 YPR BYPL 16.12

14.00

6.00 20.00 124%

7 YNK DBU 20.72 20.31

20.31 98%

8 YNK CBP 46.05 9.90

5.61

15.51 34%

9 BYPL HSRA 48.59

9.41

4.63 14.04 29%

10 SBC BWT 70.21

15.00 15.00 21%


0.00 0%

Total→ 440.80

Total→ 157.18 36%


S.No From To Km


BRT Mono

Rail

Bus

Corridor

High

Speed

Rail

Link

Metro

Rail

Total

Overlap

(Km)

%

Overlap

1 SBC MYA 92.88 36.63

12.20 48.83 53%

2 SBC YPR 5.35

4.10 5.35 9.45 177%

3 YPR TK 64.00 12.00

10.00 22.00 34%

4 YPR YNK 12.45 3.64

9.30

12.94 104%

5 YNK BYPL 19.23 11.42

11.42 59%

6 YPR BYPL 16.12

14.00

6.00 20.00 124%

7 YNK DBU 20.72 20.31

20.31 98%

8 YNK CBP 46.05 14.00

12.90

26.90 58%

9 BYPL HSRA 48.59

9.41

4.63 14.04 29%

10 SBC BWT 70.21 5.00

15.00 20.00 28%


0.00 0%

Total→ 440.8

Total→ 205.89 47%

Table: 4.5 IR Network parallel to other modes of transport

Parallel to IR Network (Km)

No Mode Length in Kms Within 1 Km Within 2 Km Within 5 Km

1 Metro Rail 114.35 29.08

25%

48.68

43%

55.18

48%

2 BRT 393.3 49.85

13%

76.48

19%

103.00

26%

3 Mono Rail 213.20 14.07

7%

23.41

11%

23.41

11%



Parallel to IR Network (Km)

No Mode Length in Kms Within 1 Km Within 2 Km Within 5 Km

4 Bus Corridor 324.40 0.00

0%

0

0%

0.00

0%

5 High Speed Rail Link 35.00 7.30

21%

10.61

30%

26.30

75%

Total→ 1080.25

100.30

9%

159.18

15%

207.89

19%

From the above, it can be seen that about 25% of commuter rail network is

along the identified commuter corridors of different modes. This clearly gives

an indication that the existing rail network is well in tune with the city‟s

commuting needs and commuting plans.

4.5 Reverse Engineering

Planning commuter system in already developed geographical areas is very

challenging. It is very expensive and also sometimes not feasible due to dense

inhabitation and sky rocketing real estate prices. If a good commuting system is

developed to a relatively less developed area, the economic activity gets

automatically shifted from dense areas to these areas. Hyderabad MMTS is the

latest beneficiary of such reverse engineering. In case of Hyderabad, their

consultant studied the demand pattern of the city commuters and suggested to

develop:

Table: 4.6 Consultant suggestions for Hyderabad MMTS

Priority Timeframe Sections

I 2006-2009 Medchal-Secunderabad, Ghatkesar-Moula Ali-Secunderabad

II 2009-2011 Secunderabad-Shamshabad, Lingampalli-Pattancheruvu

III 2011-2016 Lingampalli-Nampalli-Koti-Upppal

But, even much before the receipt of consultant‟s report (Feb ‟04), major part of

priority-III (Lingampalli - Nampalli) section was commissioned (Aug ‟03). The

reason behind giving priority III for this section by the consultant was clearly

reflected in the poor patronage of the section initially. However, the patronage

has shot up tremendously in this section and the real estate business in these



sections also shot up and resulted in many new housing projects in this section.

The priority II and III projects were subsequently sanctioned in MMTS phase-II.

Therefore, developing Bangalore commuter rail network of 440.8 Km is going to

serve the commuting public both by conventional engineering as well as by

reverse engineering.

Historically, dispersion of urbanisation by “Reverse Engineering” is possible

only with rail network but not with any other mode (like metro, mono rail, road

network or so).

4.6 Locating Commuter Rail Terminals: Enter City Core or

Terminate at Outskirts

Fundamental question posed to the consultants at various stages was whether

CRS trains should run through or stop short of city core at various sub-urban

terminals. Under the former, the trains will serve suburban and core areas.

Under the later, CRS trains will terminate at suburban terminals (say

Baiyyappanahalli, Yeshvantpur, Kengeri or so) in each direction and then

passengers going to the city core would use either a metro rail or bus service to

reach the final terminal.

The question is addressed on the commuter (user) requirements and the

service provider (IR) requirements hereunder.

4.6.1 Commuter Needs

From commuter perspective, the issue is examined on the following

dimensions:

Passenger Travel Patterns

Ability to provide alternative public transport

Impact of forced transfers on service patronage

Capacity of terminals

Regional development patterns of BMRDA



4.6.1.1 Passenger Travel Patterns

Existing travel pattern of rail commuters is shown as under:

Table: 4.7 Existing travel pattern of Bangalore rail commuters

To → Sectors

SBC YPR BYPL BWT HEB TK MYA HSRA DBU CBP From↓

Estimated

Originating

Commuters per

Day ↓

SBC 31500 21% 0% 1% 1% 30% 0% 33% 32% 1% 1% 1%

YPR sector 12000 8% 6% 1% 0% 2% 1% 75% 6% 3% 4% 2%

BYPL sector 12000 8% 9% 0% 3% 76% 0% 0% 4% 6% 0% 1%

BWT sector 34500 23% 24% 0% 10% 64% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0%

HEB sector 1500 1% 11% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 60% 29% 0%

TK sector 24000 16% 64% 13% 1% 1% 0% 21% 1% 0% 0% 0%

MYA sector 25500 17% 39% 2% 2% 2% 0% 2% 54% 0% 0% 0%

HSRA sector 4500 3% 26% 25% 14% 0% 15% 0% 0% 19% 0% 1%

DBU sector 3000 2% 35% 34% 0% 1% 11% 1% 3% 0% 15% 0%

CBP sector 1500 1% 44% 33% 17% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Total 150000 100%

YPR Sector: Yesvantpur and Malleswaram

BYPL Sector: Bangalore Cantt, Bangalore East, Baiyyappanahalli.

BWT Sector: Krishnarajapuram, Satellite Goods Terminal, Whitefield, Devangonthi, Malur, Byatrayanahalli,

Tyakal and Bangarapet.

HEB Sector: Kodigehalli, Lottegollahalli, Hebbal, Banaswadi, and Channasandra.

TK Sector: Tumkur, Kyatsandra, Hirehalli, Dobbspet, Nidvanda, Muddalinganahalli, Dodbele,

Bhairanayakanahallli, Gollahalli, Kunigal, Soldevanahalli, and Chikbanavar.

MYA Sector: Mandya, Hanakere, Maddur, Nidaghatta, Settihalli, Channapatna, Ramanagaram, Ketohalli,

Bidadi, Hejjala, Kengeri, Jnana Bharthi, and Nayandahalli.

HSRA Sector: Hosur, Anekal Road, Heelalige, Karmelaram and Belandur Road.

DBU Sector: Dodballapur, Rajankunti and Yelahanka.

CBP Sector: Chikballapur, Nandi, Venkatagiri Kota, Avatihalli, Devenahalli, Dodjala and Betthalsoor.

Source: Actual Tickets sales data that could be collected has been modelled into this matrix.

From the above, it can be seen that demand pattern is not supporting the

proposition of locating commuter terminals short of Bangalore. From

every sector, the demand pattern is to touch Bangalore.

It can be seen from the above that the traffic has two distinct patterns.

First is the traffic within the sector. This traffic is expected to be high as

people would be moving to nearby places more frequently. This traffic,

however, would not be influenced by the location of terminals as they

terminate their journeys short of the terminals.



Another is the cross sector traffic. This traffic moves across the sectors

and thus terminating traffic at suburban terminals will force a major

transhipment. It can be observed from the above table that major portion

of commuters move towards Bangalore terminal indicating predominant

preference for it.

Therefore, any attempt to locate terminals short of SBC is likely to result

in artificial transhipment of commuters on big scale. To manage this level

of avoidable transhipment, good amount of money need to be invested

apart from causing inconvenience to commuting public.

4.6.1.2 Provision of alternate Public Transport

As can be seen from the transport network, metro cannot provide complete

alternate connectivity at these (artificial) terminals. It does not serve the city

at a number of places even after accounting for the proposed metro

extensions. Further, network is such that people will be forced to have more

than one transfer to reach the destination. For example, a person from BWT

to reach YPR is forced to change to metro at BYPL, come to Majestic and

from there take a metro to reach YPR. Similar scenario can be visualised for

a number of other origin destination points.

4.6.1.3 Impact of forced transfers on service patronage

Transfers are one of the deterrents for use of a mode of transport. By

terminating the journeys at the terminals in suburbs, the patronage for

CRS would reduce considerably.

Suburban terminals like YPR, YNK, KGI and BYPL etc. cannot handle

this break in service even with huge investments. Such capacity

constraints at modal change points also reduce the patronage to CRS.

4.6.1.4 Development of BMR

If development of BMR is to happen in a seamless manner, seamless

integration of outskirts and city core is necessary. This would make the city

core easily accessible to the sub-urban public.



4.6.1.5 Indian Railways Considerations

The issue was also discussed with Railway officers of Bangalore division

and S W Railway Headquarters. They preferred through running for the

following reasons:

Terminating trains would reduce the system capacity as trains are run for

shorter distances.

Extensive infrastructure needs to be developed to handle the trains and

passengers at these terminals. At many of these stations, required

facilities are not available and difficult to develop.

Such proposition becomes unavoidable only when no solution exists for

enhancing capacity of rail network in Bangalore city core area. But as

discussed in subsequent chapters, the core Bangalore area has got

tremendous scope for additional capacity.

4.6.2 RITES Recommends

In view of above discussions, it is recommended not to terminate the

commuter trains short of Bangalore. Terminals need to be the

farthermost stations in the CRS i.e. Tumkur, Mandya, Bangarapet and

Hosur etc. All other stations including major stations like Bangalore City,

Yesvantpur etc. need to be passing through stations. In fact, with EMUs,

every station can act as terminal. The EMU gets terminated at a station,

within 5 to 10 minutes, it can start journey in reverse direction. An

additional line (or two) at every station (or at every alternate station or so)

shall be handy to terminate the EMUs. This type of Omni Terminal

system provides lot of flexibility in operations and the services can be

tailor made as per the changing needs of travelling public. This also

avoids congestion at any particular location.

4.7 Modal Transits

Commuters changing from one mode to another mode during the course of their

trip is a big challenge in urban transport planning. All stations on CRS network

act as modal transit locations because commuters normally come to station by



bus or auto or so to take the train. All stations need to be developed

accordingly to cater for this transit. With metro coming up, modal transit

facilities need to be developed at locations like BYPL, SBC etc. Developing

such arrangements are normally integrated into metro plans and as such not

considered a part of CRS project.

If the overlap of CRS with other modes is very high, it only duplicates the

service and is not desirable. If the overlap is too less, it is like a standalone

system and serves only some captive commuters. If rail system crosses other

modes just at few locations, pressure on those inter modal transit hubs shall be

very heavy and difficult to manage. Moderate overlap as seen above facilitates

transhipment of commuters from one mode to other mode at different places

and serves greater population in a meaningful way.

4.8 Conclusions

Conventional rail system has grown to its present stage over a very very long

period and is a part and parcel of common man‟s life whether for long distance

travel or commuting. Unintentionally, it has become itself integrated into the

commuting system of the city. It can itself become a mass rapid transport

system and also it can act as feeder system to other modes of transport.

Therefore, exploiting its full potential gets automatically (and so naturally)

integrated into the transport needs of the city. Such exploiting should be a

continuous process (like in the case of MRVC) rather than discrete.



5 Demand Supply Assessment

5.1 Rail Network is to be shared for 3 types of traffic

Urban and Suburban commuter Traffic.

Long and medium distance passenger Traffic.

Freight Traffic.

Demand for traffic for each of these streams is different and projected

separately. As the CRS capacity created has to be shared between 3 streams,

the demand assessment will help in optimally configuring the share of different

types of traffic.

5.2 Demand for urban and suburban Commuters

5.2.1 Macro estimates of trips by commuter rail in BMR

There are seven main commuter rail corridors in BMR area:

YPR-TK (Yeshvantpur - Tumkur)

SBC-MYA (Bangalore City - Mandya and beyond )

YNK-DBU (Yelahanka - Dodballapur)

YNK-CBP (Yelahanka - Chikballapur)

BYPL-HSRA (Baiyyappanahalli - Hosur)

BYPL-BWT (Baiyyappanahalli - Bangarapet)

SDVL – Kunigal (Soldevanahalli – Kunigal) (This line is presently under

construction by IR)

However due to the unique layout of the rail network within the central city area,

and the many „hubs‟ and the resultant „routes‟ between the hubs and

destinations in the metropolitan region, the CRS rail network of 440.8 Km

belonging to the above seven corridors were identified for the study.

Accordingly, the macro estimates in brief:



Aggregate of above existing rail network length considered is 440.8 Km.

Area of BMR (though some of the destinations are outside BMR): 800

sq.km.

Total projected population in BMR, 2031 (BMRDA‟s „Draft Report, BMR

Revised Structure Plan 2031‟): 18 million

Total projected trips in BMR, 2031 (@ a PCTR of 1.283) : 23.04 million

Total projected public transport trips in BMR, 2031 (@43% of total trips3):

9.91 million

Commuter Rail Trips (@ 30 % of public transport trips): 2.97 million.

Average no. of Commuter Rail trips per corridor (divided uniformly over

the 7 corridors) by 2031: 0.45 million (approx.).

Current (2011) daily trips on Bangalore commuter rail network is

estimated as 0.15 million.

Implied: Current percentage trips by rail is about 5 % of 2031 demand.

Potential gap in current (2011) supply and future (2031) demand for daily

trips by commuter rail: 2.82 million (approx.).

5.2.2 Assumptions for Estimating Population in CRS influence

Zone in BMR

1 Km, 2 Km and 5 Km on both sides of the rail lines have been taken as

the catchment areas of the commuter rail sections for which the

populations are estimated.

Within BBMP area, only 1 Km catchment is considered, since there would

be many other competing modes within this area. Outside BBMP, 3

catchment areas have been considered. However, the 5 Km catchment

area has been considered beyond 40 Km from the city hubs. This

assumes good connectivity to the commuter rail sections.

Population on either side of rail network (within 1 Km, 2 Km and 5 Km

catchment) is assessed based on geographical area and population

densities. For this purpose, the catchment areas in the CRS sections

3 Wilbur Smith’s Draft Final Report, Comprehensive Traffic and Transportation Study for the BMR)



were identified into districts they came under and the population density

of the districts as per census 2011 is taken:

Wilbur Smith’s Draft Final Report, Comprehensive Traffic and Transportation Study for the BMR)

Table: 5.1 Population density in 2011

Area Density (per Sq. Km)

BBMP 10592.5

Bangalore District 4378

Bangalore Rural District 441

Ramanagara District 303

Mandya District 365

Tumkur District 253

Kolar District 384

Chikballapur District 298

Source: http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011-prov-results/prov_data_products_karnatka.html

Decadal growth rate of population is assumed as:

Table: 5.2 Assumed decadal growth rate of population

Area BMR BBMP Rest of the Area

2011 – 2021 29.14% 25.29% 39.43%

2021 – 2031 26.77% 25.29% 30.40%

Distance of each section is split into various districts as under:

Table: 5.3 Split of each section district wise

Distance in various Districts (Kms)

No From To

BB

MP

Ban

gal

ore

Ban

gal

ore

Ru

ral

Ram

anag

ara

Man

dy

a

Tu

mku

r

Ko

lar

To

tal

Dis

tance

(Km

s)

1 SBC MYA 12.3 11

46 23.58

92.88

2 SBC YPR 5.35

5.35

3 YPR TK 7.9 13 31.1

12

64

4 YPR YNK 12.45

12.45

5 YNK BYPL 19.23

19.23

6 YPR BYPL 16.12

16.12

7 YNK DBU 3.8 10.92 6

20.72





Distance in various Districts (Kms)

No From To

BB

MP

Ban

gal

ore

Ban

gal

ore

Rura

l

Ram

anag

ara

Man

dya

Tum

kur

Kola

r

Tota

l

Dis

tance

(Km

s)

8 YNK CBP 2.2 13.8 30.05

46.05

9 BYPL HSRA 13.4 35.19

48.59

10 SBC BYPL 10.76

10.76

11 BYPL BWT 10.9

18

30.55 59.45

12 SDVL Kunigal

16 7.2 16

6

45.2

Total → 114.41 99.91 92.35 62 23.58 18 30.55 440.8

Typical modal split of commuter traffic in Mumbai4.

Table: 5.4 Modal split of commuter traffic in Mumbai

Mode Trips (Millions) Share

Rail 6.5 46%

Bus 4.7 34%

Autos etc. 1.4 10%

Personal Cars etc. 0.7 5%

Walk 0.7 5%

Total → 14.0 100%

5.2.3 Assumption for Estimating the CRS Commuters demand

PCTR (Per Capita Trip Rate) is taken as:

Table: 5.5 Per Capita Trip Rate

Year PCTR Source

2011 1.00 WSA CTTP for BMR

2021 1.10 Assumed

2031 1.28 WSA CTTP for BMR

Modal shares are highly influenced by trip lengths. RITES (2011) data for

BDA area, given in Table below is used as a basis to assume appropriate

modal shares:

4 Source: http:// essay 535. blogspot.in / 2008/03/some-reflections-on-transport-problems.html



Table: 5.6 Modal share Vs trip lengths

Trip

Length Bus Car

Two

Wheeler

Three

Wheeler Cycle Walk Total

0 – 2 0% 0% 20% 0% 8% 72% 100%

02-05 12% 3% 50% 29% 5% 0% 100%

05-10 11% 13% 60% 14% 2% 0% 100%

10-15 68% 7% 15% 9% 0% 0% 100%

15 – 20 68% 7% 15% 9% 0% 0% 100%

20 – 35 83% 4% 11% 1% 0% 0% 100%

> 35 85% 12% 0% 3% 0% 0% 100%

Total 42% 7% 29% 12% 2% 8% 100%

Average

Trip

Length

14.99 11.59 8.02 8.59 3.88 1.01 10.57

Source: RITES report, Comprehensive Traffic and Transportation Plan for Bengaluru 2011

Trip lengths that can attract CRS are normally beyond about 10 to 15

Kms. Thus, CRS mostly captures the traffic from Bus.

Considering all the above, CRS is assumed to attract up to 30% of

commuters within 1 to 5 Km catchment on either side of the railway line.

Depending on its success, this can be increased to cover population

even beyond 5 Km catchment on either side of railway line and also up to

50% of commuters in future as in case of Mumbai. However, demand in

city core area will be less and also catchment will be less due to presence

of competing modes like Metro etc.

Accordingly, Demand for urban/suburban rail traffic is assessed in 3

scenarios:

o Scenario I (Low Patronage Scenario): Basic CRS services with very

low multimodal integration at stations: 1 Km catchment area and 10%

modal share of total trips.

o Scenario II (Medium Patronage Scenario): Full-fledged CRS services

but with low multimodal integration: 2 Km catchment area and 20%

modal share of total trips.

o Scenario III (High Patronage Scenario): Full-fledged CRS services but

with good multimodal integration: 5 Km catchment area and 30% modal

share of total trips.



The three scenarios discussed above are summarised as under:

Table: 5.7 The three scenarios

Low Medium High

BBMP Other Area BBMP Other Area BBMP Other Area

Year

Per

Cap

ita

Trip

Rat

e $

Cat

chm

ent

Mo

dal

Sh

are

of

CR

S

Cat

chm

ent

Mo

dal

Sh

are

of

CR

S

Cat

chm

ent

Mo

dal

Sh

are

of

CR

S

Cat

chm

ent

Mo

dal

Sh

are

of

CR

S

Cat

chm

ent

Mo

dal

Sh

are

of

CR

S

Cat

chm

ent

Mo

dal

Sh

are

of

CR

S

2011 1.00 1 Km 10% 1 Km 10% 1 Km 10% 2 Km 20% 1 Km 10% 5 Km 30%

2021 1.10 1 Km 10% 1 Km 10% 1 Km 10% 2 Km 20% 1 Km 10% 5 Km 30%

2031 1.28 1 Km 10% 1 Km 10% 1 Km 10% 2 Km 20% 1 Km 10% 5 Km 30%

$ PCTR for 2011 and 2031 is adopted from Draft final report Jun ‘2010 of M/s Wilbur Smith Associates on Comprehensive

Traffic and Transportation Study for Bangalore Metropolitan Region for BMRDA. However, for 2021 it is assumed as 1.10.

5.2.4 Suburban Demand in 3 scenarios

After studying the Travel Pattern of existing commuter train services and

after detailed deliberations with S W Railway and GoK, 440.8 Km is

identified as potential CRS network. Demand is assessed in this network

as under:

Table: 5.8 Assessed Commuter Rail Trips (Scenario: Low)

No From To Distance in

Kms

Assessed Demand (Scenario : Low)

(Commuter Rail Trips) Share

2011 2021 2031

1 SBC MYA 92.88 40198 57600 85264 12%

2 SBC YPR 5.35 11334 15620 22772 3%

3 YPR TK 64.00 31469 45662 67915 10%

4 YPR YNK 12.45 8050 11095 16175 2%

5 YNK BYPL 19.23 40739 56146 81853 12%

6 YPR BYPL 16.12 34150 47065 68615 10%

7 YNK DBU 20.72 18141 26571 39659 6%

8 YNK CBP 46.05 19394 29021 43654 6%

9 BYPL HSRA 48.59 59200 86382 128747 19%

10 SBC BYPL 10.76 22795 31416 45800 7%

11 BYPL BWT 59.45 27025 37858 55551 8%

12 SDVL Kunigal 45.2 15918 24414 37046 5%

Total → 440.8 328413 468850 693051 100%



Table: 5.9 Assessed Commuter Rail Trips (Scenario: Medium)


Kms

Assessed Demand (Scenario : Medium)

(Commuter Rail Trips) Share

2011 2021 2031

1 SBC MYA 92.88 82620 122663 183992 13%

2 SBC YPR 5.35 11334 15620 22772 2%

3 YPR TK 64.00 75668 113451 170779 12%

4 YPR YNK 12.45 8050 11095 16175 1%

5 YNK BYPL 19.23 40739 56146 81853 6%

6 YPR BYPL 16.12 34150 47065 68615 5%

7 YNK DBU 20.72 48413 73001 110111 8%

8 YNK CBP 46.05 63595 96813 146523 11%

9 BYPL HSRA 48.59 151637 228155 343875 25%

10 SBC BYPL 10.76 22795 31416 45800 3%

11 BYPL BWT 59.45 38827 55958 83017 6%

12 SDVL Kunigal 45.2 47754 73241 111137 8%

Total → 440.8 625582 924624 1384649 100%

Table: 5.10 Assessed Commuter Rail Trips (Scenario: High)

Assessed Demand (Scenario : High)

(Commuter Rail Trips)


Kms 2011 2021 2031 Share

1 SBC MYA 92.88 117298 175851 264700 13%

2 SBC YPR 5.35 11334 15620 22772 1%

3 YPR TK 64.00 120125 181636 274242 14%

4 YPR YNK 12.45 8050 11095 16175 1%

5 YNK BYPL 19.23 40739 56146 81853 4%

6 YPR BYPL 16.12 34150 47065 68615 3%

7 YNK DBU 20.72 53290 80481 121462 6%

8 YNK CBP 46.05 97865 149374 226279 11%

9 BYPL HSRA 48.59 280955 426493 644835 32%

10 SBC BYPL 10.76 22795 31416 45800 2%

11 BYPL BWT 59.45 67576 100051 149924 7%

12 SDVL Kunigal 45.2 50486 77432 117496 6%

Total → 440.8 904663 1352660 2034153 100%

From the above tables, it can be seen that most important sections from

commuter‟s consideration are:

BYPL-HSRA (constitutes 32% of demand)

YPR-TK (constitutes 14% of demand)

SBC-MYA (constitutes 13% of demand)

YPR-CBP (constitutes 11% of demand).



But all these sections are non-electrified sections and/or mostly single line

sections. For introducing CRS, these sections need to be made double line

electrified sections with automatic signalling.

5.3 Urban and suburban rail services – Present supply

position

As per the present services being run, supply is assessed as under:

Table: 5.11 Suburban rail services – Supply position

S.No Sector From To

Dis

tance

(K

m)

No of @

Commuter

Services at

present

Total

Coaches

being run

at present

Passengers

Capacity

(@ 150 per

coach in

case of

passenger

coach and

200 in case

of DEMU/

MEMU coach)

Passenger

Km being

Run

No of

passeng

er trips

being

served #

1 MYA SBC MYA 92.88 10 114 17100 1588248 46990

2 YPR SBC YPR 5.35 18 204 30600 163710 4843

3 TK YPR TK 64 14 164 24600 1574400 46580

4 HEB YPR YNK 12.45 6 62 9300 115785 3426

5 HEB YNK BYPL 19.23 2 16 3200 61536 1821

7 DBU YNK DBU 20.72 4 48 7200 149184 4414

8 CBP YNK CBP 46.05 4 30 5300 244065 7221

9 HSRA BYPL HSRA 48.59 6 62 10100 490759 14519

10 BYPL SBC BYPL 12 24 242 40000 480000 14201

11 BWT BYPL BWT 58 20 198 34600 2006800 59373

Total → 108 1140 182000 6874487 203388$ # Assuming average trip length as 33.8 Km as taken from Indian Railways Year Book 10-11

$ This tallies with the ridership assessment of 150000 made from ticket sales analysis. @ List of present commuter services is at Annexure - 4

From the above table, it can be seen that present supply is able to cater for

about 30% of commuter demand (medium scenario) of 2011.

5.4 Demand for Non-suburban Trains

The demand for non-suburban passenger trains is based on the long term

growth trends of non-suburban passenger traffic on IR. Historical trend of

passenger and passenger kilometre growth of non-suburban passengers is

given in the Table below.



Table: 5.12 Historical trend of passenger growth

Passenger growth rate % PKM growth rate in %

1950-51 to 10-11 2.4 4.4

2000-01 to 2010 to 11 6.2 7.7

As the growth in passengers is accomplished by increasing the number of trains

and also augmenting the existing trains, it is assumed that demand for new

services would be around 3.5 per cent of the existing traffic. Currently from

Bangalore and its suburbs around 146 (63 daily + 83 non-daily) trains are run.

The 83 non-daily trains are equivalent to 22.4 daily trains thus giving total of

85.4 trains. Thus, it is estimated that around 3 additional daily trains are initiated

every year. This estimate is high compared to the existing pattern of providing

new services.

5.5 Demand for Freight Services

The rail freight is split into the following two scenarios:

Business as usual

Aggressive Market capture

In the business as usual scenario, the freight is limited to bulk cargo like cement

and steel, and Exim container cargo. Then freight growth would be at historical

trend – around 1-2 trains per annum.

In the aggressive market capture approach, in addition to the above forecast,

additional non bulk traffic is expected. In this scenario traffic will be much higher

but cannot be predicted easily. As per RITES national estimates, non-bulk

occupies around 25 % of the national traffic and there could be 6-7 rakes of

non-bulk cargo. If such a scenario emerges, then IR and GoK have to think of

ring rail system so that freight trains by pass the city core.

5.6 All three streams of demand put together

Bangalore area is predominantly a passenger intensive area i.e. number of

freight trains dealt in the system are much less compared to passenger trains



handled. However, higher freight trains load (per day) on the system are

assumed in the above discussion.

Before introducing any long distance train, Indian Railways assesses the

capacity of the system. If there is need to enhance certain facilities, Railways

themselves plan such facilities and allot necessary funds. Similarly, for

enhancing the freight capacity also, necessary facilities are developed by Indian

Railways with their own funds depending on the requirement.

Measures suggested in various phases of this report are aimed at running trains

at about 10 minutes frequency. These phases are very much enough to take

care of the above cited quantum of increase in long distance trains and freight

trains apart from meeting the commuter requirement.

Therefore, long term growth of long distance passenger trains and freight trains

should not be a cause of concern while planning the commuter services.

5.7 How realistic is the demand forecast?

Recent commuter systems in India are found to have been falling short of the

initial traffic projections as seen under.

Table: 5.13 Traffic Projections for various commuter system in India

System Initial Traffic Projections Average Rider ship on date

DMRC 33.7 Lacs

(by 2009)

19 Lacs (Maximum: 22 Lacs on 01/08/12)

(Over 187 Km network)

Hyderabad MMTS 3 Lacs 1.6 Lacs

BMRCL 10.2 Lacs (by 2011)

16.1 Lacs (by 2021)

Not known as very short stretch is

commissioned so far.

Therefore, to have some idea of the reliability of traffic projections made for

CRS, these projections are compared with BMRCL projections as under:

BMRCL Traffic Projections : 16.1 Lacs (by 2021)

Length of metro network : 114.4 Km (Phase I & II together)



Ridership projection per Km : 0.141 Lacs/Km.

BMRCL is in urban districts. Population density of urban districts is almost 10 times the population density of rural districts. In the above lines, CRS demand in 2021 is: Total length

: 440.8 Km

Length falling in urban districts (50%) : 220.4 Km

Length falling in rural districts : 220.4 Km

Demand in 2021 = (220.4 x 0.141) + (220.4 x 0.141÷10)

= 34 Lacs

But, as seen in Table 5.10, CRS demand in 2021 for high scenario is estimated

as 13.52 Lacs which is far less than 34 Lacs projected based on BMRCL

methodology.

Thus, it can be reasonably concluded that demand estimation is quite

conservative and poor patronage of fully developed CRS network will be a very

remote possibility provided feeder roads and last mile connectivity are properly

addressed. It can also be seen in subsequent chapters that in case demand is

going to be far higher than projections, such demand can be met by simply

procuring additional EMU rakes as necessary infrastructure (even for higher

than projected demand) is already covered in various phases recommended.

5.8 Bridging Suburban Demand - Supply gap

Various measures suggested in phases 1A, 1, 2 and 3 are to be implemented

religiously to bridge Suburban demand supply gap (considering high scenario

demand of 2021). Services required to be introduced to bridge the demand

supply gap is as under:



Table: 5.14 Assessment of additional services required to bridge demand supply gap

From To Distance

(Km)

No of

Commuter

Services at

present

Assessed Commuter

trips (2021)

for Demand

High

Scenario

Commuter Trips

generated

by existing

Services @

Commuter

Trips after upgrading

present

services to

EMUs /

MEMUs $

Balance requiremen

t to be met

by

additional

Services

Additional

Services

Required $

Additional

Services

rounded

off &

1 SBC MYA 92.88 10 175851 46992 82710 93141 9.415 10

2 SBC YPR 5.35 18 15620 4846 7172 8448 14.826 16

3 YPR TK 64 14 181636 46576 64756 116880 17.146 18

4 YPR YNK 12.45 6 11095 3426 5304 5791 4.367 4

5 YNK BYPL 19.23 2 56146 1820 4096 52050 25.413 26

6 YPR BYPL 16.12 0 47065 0 1470 45595 27.412 28

7 YNK DBU 20.72 4 80481 4412 4412 76069 34.469 34

8 YNK CBP 46.05 4 149374 7222 19622 129752 26.454 26

9 BYPL HSRA 48.59 6 426493 14520 14520 411973 79.320 80

10 SBC BYPL 12 24 31416 14112 21884 9532 7.458 8

11 BYPL BWT 58.21 18 100051 59382 97922 2129 0.343 0

12 SDVL Kunigal 45.2 0 77432 0 0 77432 16.084 16

Total → 440.8 106 1352660 203308 323868 1028792 262.707 266 @ Commuter Trips are worked out taking average trip length as 33.8 Km (Indian Railways Year Book 10-11)

$ Worked out based on MEMU rake length of 16 cars and EMU rake length of 15 cars taking EMU capacity as 240 and MEMU capacity as 200.

& Rounded off to nearest even digit because they have to form pairs of trains for Up & Dn direction

Capacity created by various measures suggested in this report (Annexure – 9)

is more than the additional services required to meet the demand.



6 CRS Implementation: Infrastructure Development

6.1 Backdrop

The existing rail network in Bangalore area got developed over a period of time.

The recent major rail projects for Bangalore area:

Table: 6.1 Major rail projects in Bangalore area in the past

Project Year

Bangalore – Guntakal Gauge Conversion 1983

Bangalore – Mysore Gauge Conversion 1992

Bangalore – Tumkur Gauge Conversion 1993

Each of the above projects substantially altered the rail network scenario of

Bangalore. But, the thrust in every project was to complete the project and give

some connection to Bangalore. Scope of none of these projects had any

means or provision to study the rail network in Bangalore area in a holistic and

integrated view. With the result, Bangalore rail system became a cluster of

small piecemeal systems rather than any holistic system. It is due to this

legacy, the system is not geared up for suburban operations. This leaves lot of

potential and opportunity to study and upgrade the system to serve larger public

needs specially commuting needs. In fact, the system needs complete overhaul

and redesign (but not incremental up gradations) to serve as good suburban rail

system apart from serving long distance passenger traffic and freight traffic.

6.2 CRS: Need for Integrated Assessment

As explained earlier, CRS has number of advantages. But to implement the

CRS successfully, one needs to take a comprehensive view of rail facility

development in an integrated manner. Limitations of the existing system have

been highlighted in above paragraph. Unless an integrated assessment is done,

it would not be possible to introduce the CRS. Rail network throughput would be

determined by the most constraining point even if capacity is available at other

locations. Thus one needs to thoroughly overhaul the system than simply tinker



with the system to improve capacity throughout the system. For the purpose of

the analysis, components of the rail system are considered as under:

Terminals: Stations where trains originate/terminate. These stations are

supposed to have train maintenance facilities, watering facilities etc.

Again passenger terminals and freight terminals need different facilities.

Sections: Straight portions between two terminals or important stations

(like SBC-MYA, YNK-DBU etc.).

Stations: Locations where passengers entrain/detrain.

Rolling Stock: Cars/coaches for running the trains.

Train Operation Plans

Strategies to implement CRS in Bangalore are discussed in respect of each of

these components.

6.3 Terminal Strategies

6.3.1 Bangalore Terminal (SBC)

6.3.1.1 Over View

This is the main hub of Bangalore city. Almost every commuter of Bangalore

wants to have direct link to this station from his/her place. Therefore, maximum

number of trains should pass through this station for better service to the public.

Today, SBC position is such that it cannot handle even one additional train. It is

not in a position to effectively handle a major delay in arrival or departure of

even a single train. As already brought out above, SBC has evolved

historically and needs radical redesign to serve commuters needs and

aspirations. Tinkering is not going to help.

Presently Bangalore yard has 10 platform lines, 6 pit lines (maintenance lines),

8 stabling lines and a few other lines. Platform lines are meant for entraining

and detraining passengers. Pit lines are meant for undertaking the repairs for

each rake (train). These pit lines have necessary facilities for scheduled

maintenance after each trip. Stabling lines are meant for stabling trains during

their idle time or when they are waiting for their turn onto platform line or pit line.



Capacity of any terminal depends on:

Number of platforms.

Number of lines (platform lines, pit lines, stabling lines, shunting lines

etc.).

Length of each line. More the length of each line, higher is the capacity of

the yard.

Interconnectivity of all these lines. Ideally all platform lines should be

universal i.e. train from/to any direction (BYPL or YPR or MYS) should be

able to enter/exit any platform line.

Connectivity of platform lines with pit lines, stabling lines and shunting

lines etc. Ideally, all platform lines should have connection to all pit lines,

shunting lines and stabling lines etc.

Lie-Over i.e. time spent by each train in the yard (Lesser the lie-over,

more is the capacity).

Requirement of Engine Reversal for the train. More the trains which need

engine reversals, lesser is the capacity of the yard.

Type of Maintenance required for the train in the yard:

o Primary Maintenance (Needs about 7 Hrs. minimum lie-over).

o Secondary Maintenance (Needs about 3 Hrs. minimum lie-over).

o No Maintenance (Needs no lie-over).

6.3.1.2 Platforms:

The 10 platforms present in SBC yard today are fully occupied and there is

hardly any slot on any platform for dealing additional trains. SBC is catering to

3 directions i.e. YPR, BYPL and MYS. If commuter trains are to be dealt from 3

directions, SBC should have at least 2 platforms exclusively for commuter

trains. With the present level of platform occupation, no platform can be

exclusively earmarked for commuter trains. In fact, hardly any additional train

can be dealt on any of the existing platforms. Therefore, it is required to

construct at least 2 additional platforms.



SBC yard has got 4 pit lines sandwiched between platform lines. These 4 pit

lines can be conveniently converted into 2 platforms and they can be earmarked

for commuters. However, the pit lines need to be relocated to accommodate

platforms.

On MYS end of the yard, there is vacant land (Binny Mills Land) which can be

conveniently used for constructing exclusive commuter platforms and/or pit

lines. This is the first and foremost requirement for introducing CRS trains in

SBC.

Figure: 6.1 Binny Mill land towards Mysore end

Being in very prime location, Binny Mills Land may be difficult to get spared to

Railways. Therefore, part of this land if not full can be spared to Railways so

that possible number of platforms and/or pit lines can be constructed here. And

to that extent, SBC can be provided with additional platforms for commuter

trains.

6.3.1.3 Lie-Overs and Engine Reversals

Presently SBC yard is dealing 92 coaching trains (some of them are daily and

some of them are non-daily). Close look at the trains being dealt at SBC

shows:



Table: 6.2 Rakes lie over at SBC

Trains that need no Maintenance

(Lie-Over required : 5 Minutes)

Trains that need Secondary Maintenance

(Lie-Over required: 3 Hrs.)

Trains that need Primary Maintenance

(Lie-Over required: 7 Hrs.)

Engine Reversal needed?

Lie-Over ↓ Yes No Yes No Yes No

≤ 30 Minutes 8 23

> 30 Mts ≤ 1 Hr 4 4

> 1 Hr ≤ 2 Hr 6

> 2 Hr ≤ 4 Hr 5

> 4 Hr ≤ 6 Hr 1 1

> 6 Hr ≤ 8 Hr

> 8 Hr ≤ 10 Hr 2 8

> 10 Hr ≤ 12 Hr 3 2 3

> 12 Hr ≤ 14 Hr 2 2 5

> 14 Hr ≤ 16 Hr 2

> 16 Hr ≤ 18 Hr 3

> 18 Hr ≤ 20 Hr 1

Total → 26 33 4 22

Details at Annexure-1

From the above, it can be seen that:

Very few trains only leave the yard within the minimum lie-over required.

Majority of the trains are lying-over for more time than required (even

more than 18 Hrs. in case of one train).

52 trains (out of 85) need engine reversals.

It is highly difficult for the yard to handle such massive lie-over and engine

reversals. It is because of this reason, many empty rakes are being taken to

Baiyyappanahalli marshalling yard, Krishnarajapuram, Whitefield and Bangalore

Cantt just for stabling during their idle time. To stable these rakes and to bring

back these rakes to SBC, light engines are also being moved. All these

unproductive movements are badly eating away the capacity of SBC as well as



SBC-WFD section which can otherwise be used productively to run more

commuter services.

If such lie-over and engine reversals are eliminated (or minimised), capacity of

the yard can be increased. The solution lies in making the SBC a pass through

station from the present state of terminal station. Or terminal activities

(maintenance of rakes) should be brought down to such a level that rakes do

not spend more time than required in the yard. Thus, all (or some) terminal

activities should be shifted away from SBC to some other convenient location

i.e. additional terminals should be developed. This creates enough capacity to

deal more commuter trains and also to handle any additional long distance

trains and freight trains.

6.3.1.4 Lengths of various Lines: The Operational constraints

Table: 6.3 Lines length of SBC yard

Line No Type of Line Length (in Metres) Length (in Vehicles) Present Utilisation

1 PF-1 659 26 Coaches 63%

2 PF-2 589 24 Coaches 100%

3 PF-3 572 24 Coaches 46%

4 PF-4 598 24 Coaches 71%

5 Stabling Line 476 19 Coaches



8 PF-5 559 24 Coaches 63%

9 PF-6 495 20 Coaches 71%

10 PF-7 462 19 Coaches 45%

11 PF-8 570 23 Coaches 71%

12 PF-9 625 26 Coaches 42%

13 PF-10 602 25 Coaches 63%

Pit Lines 3 Pit Lines : 24 Coaches Each 2 Pit Lines : 21 Coaches Each

1 Pit line : 18 Coaches

85% 92% 79% 60% 75% 75%

Shunting Neck At YPR End : 24 Coaches At BWT End : 26 Coaches

With ever growing demand for more capacity, numbers of coaches get

increased for more and more trains. Freight trains are normally full length trains

(means 686 metres). Longer passenger trains and freight trains can be dealt



only on very few lines in SBC yard as can be seen above. Inadequate length of

lines coupled with absence of universal reception and despatch facilities for all

the lines forces number of unproductive (shunt) movements in the yard and thus

adversely affects the capacity of the SBC yard.

Thus, SBC needs to offload some of its terminal activities and also needs to

increase in length of lines.

6.3.1.5 Interconnectivity of Lines

SBC yard has 10 platforms presently as under:

Table: 6.4 Interconnectivity of running lines at SBC

PF Entry/Exit towards

BYPL

Entry/Ext towards MYS

end

Entry/Exit towards YPR

end

1 Yes No No

2 Yes No No

3 Yes No No

4 Yes No No

5 Yes Yes No

6 Yes Yes No

7 Yes Yes No

8 No Yes Yes

9 No Yes Yes

10 No Yes Yes

Trains Arriving from

this direction 49 20 23

From the above, it can be seen that majority of the trains enter into SBC yard

from BYPL side. They can come only onto PFs 1 to 7. Out of these platforms,

4 platforms have no exit to other directions. Trains received onto these 4

platforms cannot go anywhere. Presently, trains received from BYPL are being

disposed by:

Reversing to BYPL side (to start as new train).

Reversing to BYPL side (for stabling at stations like BNC or so).

Placing onto stabling lines.

Placing on pit lines.



Keeping on the platform itself until it needs to be stared as new train

(even for 6 to 8 hrs. or so).

Despatching towards MYS.

All the above disposal schemes except the last one consume lot of time.

Engine also needs to be reversed. A few shunt movements (movements from

one line to another within the yard) are also required. These shunt movements

have to wait in between to give way for trains entering and leaving the yard

from/to different directions. In shunt movements alone, each train may need to

spend a couple of hours bringing down the capacity of the yard drastically.

For the trains entering SBC from MYS or YPR, the situation is not this much

critical. Trains from MYS can go either towards BYPL or YPR as seen from

above table. Trains from YPR also can go towards MYS. However, if they are

terminated at SBC, they are to be taken onto stabling lines or pit lines. Such

terminal activities need lot of shunt movements and take away substantial

capacity of SBC.

Due to above cited constraints coupled with heavy lie-over and inadequate line

lengths, SBC is not able to use the platforms and pit lines to the full extent as

seen in above tables.

It is for this reason, any new train announced by Ministry of Railways shall

either run short of Bangalore (like YPR, BYPL or so) or it is accommodated by

making some other existing train to terminate short of Bangalore. Trains which

are ideally required to come to SBC but are presently terminated short of SBC

are:

Table: 6.5 Trains being terminated short of SBC

Train No From To Terminated

Station Time

66533 BWT KJM KJM 19:10:00

66534 KJM BWT KJM 19:30:00

76506 KQZ BNC BNC 09:40:00

76507 BNC BWT BNC 11:00:00

76508 BWT BNC BNC 17:20:00

76505 BNC KQZ BNC 17:55:00



These trains are during peak commuter timings and they can serve commuters

better if these trains can be brought up to SBC.

There should also be seamless movement of trains from YPR/BYPL side to

MYS side for enhanced capacity of SBC.

Trains coming from MYS side and getting terminated here should be able

to go to pit lines or to BYPL side easily.

Terminating trains should be taken onto stabling lines or pit lines without

reversing the engine and without any shunt movements. This way, the

terminating train shall leave the yard within about 10 minutes.

To achieve these objectives, all the lines of SBC should have entry/exit to MYS

side. However, this connection needs some Binny Mills land. Image showing

typical arrangement of connection to MYS side is shown in figure 5.2 above.

6.3.1.6 Yard Speeds

Normally, trains move with 15 Kmph in yards. But with latest improvements in

turnouts and signalling technology, speed in yard can be enhanced to 30 Kmph

while redesigning the yard.

In the above lines, SBC yard should be redesigned such that:

Few platforms are exclusively nominated for commuter trains.

Figure: 6.2 Connecting MYS line to grid one



All lines have universal R&D facilities from all directions (BYPL, YPR and

MYS directions).

All lines shall be of full length (i.e. full length freight train or coaching

train).

Other lines like shunting necks, pit lines (if provided) etc. also should be

of full length.

Speed in SBC yard is 30 Kmph

To make all these options feasible, a very meticulous and innovative detailing is

required while redesigning the SBC yard.

If the yard is redesigned like this, SBC yard shall have:

Purely passenger handling facilities.

Almost nil terminal activities and shunting operations.

Almost all lines with universal reception and despatch facilities.

Almost all lines with full length.

Speed of 30 Kmph.

Capacity :

Table: 6.6 Scenario of SBC yard after suggested remodelling

Present

Likely to be

(if above cited measures are

implemented)

Platforms

10

(different lengths and

without universal R&D)

14 or 15

(More or less full length

and universal R&D)

Capacity (commuters, long distance and freight)

60 pairs of trains per day 150 pairs of trains per day

6.3.2 Yesvantpur Terminal

YPR, the second coaching terminal of Bangalore is presently dealing with 89

passenger and express trains. It has got 6 platforms, 3 pit lines and 7 stabling

lines and a few other lines. Presently, the 6 platform lines have got entry/exit

facility to all the 3 directions (SBC direction, TK direction and YNK direction)

and therefore, add to operational flexibility.



Some terminating trains are waiting in stabling lines for their turn onto pit lines.

This necessitates shunt movements and eats away some yard capacity.

Therefore, additional pit lines are required at YPR for increasing the yard

capacity. Work is presently in progress for providing 1 additional pit line. If 3

more pit lines are constructed, terminal capacity of YPR increases to about 60

pairs from the present 37 pairs of trains. Pit lines can be constructed by

converting some of the existing stabling lines into pit lines. Normally, 2 stabling

lines go away for 1 pit line. Therefore, S W Rly should critically analyse the

operational implications of retaining stabling lines as it is and/or replacing a few

of them into pit lines and plan for optimum number of additional pit lines.

Possibility of acquiring military land for Railway operations at YPR also need to

be explored so that additional pit lines can be constructed without any difficulty.

6.3.3 Additional Terminals

Presently, there are only 2 passenger terminals in Bangalore (SBC and YPR)

as brought out above. These 2 terminals are fully busy with long distance trains

and hardly can deal any more trains (commuter or otherwise). If at all CRS

need to be introduced in Bangalore meaningfully, these 2 terminals are grossly

inadequate and additional terminals need to be developed as already brought

out in above paragraphs. For locating additional terminals, the major criteria

are:

The locations should have enough land.

The locations should be close to SBC.

The locations should have seamless movement to SBC yard.

The locations should be such that long distance and commuter trains do

not conflict their interests each other but supplement each other.

The location should have good road connectivity.

More the terminals, the better it is. More terminals facilitate more dispersion of

congestion and also reduces load on any particular terminal. Thus, more

capacity to run commuter trains. As per the preliminary studies and as per



interactions with South Western Railway officials, it is felt necessary to develop

terminals at 3 locations as under:

Binny Mill Land just at MYS end of SBC yard.

Railway Land at BYPL (adjoining NGEF land) where presently

marshalling yard and stabling lines exist (about 11 Km from SBC).

An EMU Terminal (EMU Maintenance shed).

6.3.4 Binny Mill Land Terminal: An extension to SBC terminal

Figure: 6.3 Utilisation of Binny Mill Land for Commuter terminal

In fact, this is not a new terminal; But an extension of SBC terminal. As already

discussed in above paragraphs, this area can be provided with a few platforms

and/or pit lines so that these additional platforms can be earmarked exclusively

for commuter trains. The above image shows the typical arrangement of

platforms etc. in Binny Mill Land. This arrangement can accommodate about 12

lines (pit lines or platform lines or any other line). Feeder roads also can be

developed easily for this terminal as this area is well connected by road

network. This is also nearer to the metro station coming up nearby. Therefore,

this proposition is very ideal and most of the problems of SBC can be solved in

one go with this terminal. This arrangement needs full Binny Mill Land. This



land shall make an excellent suburban terminal at SBC to deal commuter trains

from all directions.

Binny Mill land is in very prime location and has lot of commercial value. In

case it is not practicable to give this whole land to Railways, part of the land can

also be spared to Railways so that just a few facilities can be constructed

instead of full-fledged coaching facilities. Binny Mills land issue should be

deliberated with open mind along with all stake holders. Depending on the

extent of land that can be spared, facilities can be planned here. Issue of Binny

Mill land is discussed in detail in Para 7.4.

6.3.5 Baiyyappanahalli North: The Maintenance Terminal

6.3.5.1 Advantage and Ease of Construction

Mumbai has got many terminals like CSTM, Dadar, LTT, Kalyan, BCT and

Thane etc. Unless so many terminals are planned like this, dispersion of traffic

shall be a big problem.

At Baiyyappanahalli, presently there is a marshalling yard (adjoining NGEF

land). This yard is mostly being used for stabling passenger rakes of trains

terminated at SBC due to non-availability of lines at SBC. This land can be

effectively used to build about 20 to 25 lines. About 10 pit lines, 5 stabling lines,

6 R&D lines (for goods) and 2 to 5 platforms (for passenger trains) can be

planned here. Image of the typical arrangements is also shown.

Advantages of this arrangement:

Good number of trains presently getting terminated at SBC can be

terminated at BYPL (North).

Demands for introducing almost 30 trains from SBC remain unmet on

date for want of capacity at SBC. Such demands can be met by

developing BYPLN terminal.

A few commuter trains also can pass through this station and stop at this

station.



Figure: 6.4 Baiyyappanahalli (North) maintenance terminal

This area is presently in non-signalled territory of South Western Railway.

Therefore, execution of work does not involve obstruction to running

trains. In Railway‟s parlance, this is almost a green field project, thus

making the execution easier and simpler.

This terminal eases off the SBC yard to a very great extent and SBC can

be improved to handle more commuter trains by providing more platforms

and lengthier platforms with almost universal R&D facilities.

This is very nearer to BYPL metro station. Long distance passengers can

easily go to metro station from this BYPLN new terminal. A skywalk can

also be planned in future to facilitate transhipment.

Scenario of BYPLN (Baiyyappanahalli North) yard shall be:

Table: 6.7 Likely scenario of BYPL (N) 3rd coaching terminal

Present Likely scenario after the above

measures are taken

Platforms 0 5

Capacity (commuter and long

distance) 0 70 Pairs

6.3.5.2 BYPLN needs to be a coaching terminal or maintenance terminal?

During discussion by stake holders organised by DULT on 11th June ‟12,

it was discussed that BYPLN can as well be made as maintenance

terminal instead of full-fledged coaching terminal.



By making BYPLN as only maintenance terminal, empty rakes are to be

moved to BYPLN from SBC and/or YPR for maintenance and they should

be taken back to SBC and/or YPR after maintenance. Such empty rakes

movements on perpetual basis is a drain on precious resources like

paths, engines, fuel, crew etc.

Like in case of Mumbai, number of coaching terminals are needed for

dispersion of congestion. Already, SBC yard is too congested with the

existing trains. If more and more CRS trains are dealt at SBC,

passenger‟s congestion at SBC will become unmanageable.

However, there may be public resistance to terminate good number of

existing trains at BYPLN instead of SBC even if full facilities are

developed.

Therefore, it is recommended to make the BYPLN as a small station

instead of full-fledged coaching terminal with 3 PFs and rest all with

stabling lines and pit lines. This way, BYPLN shall be predominantly a

maintenance terminal. The 3 PFs facilitate dealing CRS trains and also

terminating any new trains announced by MoR in future.

IR can convert this into full-fledged coaching terminal in future depending

on the necessity to introduce more and more long distance trains.

6.3.6 EMU Terminal

Presently, no EMU shed (EMU terminal) exists in Bangalore area. With

implementation of CRS, maintenance facilities for EMUs and MEMUs need to

be developed. EMU shed should be so located that it is possible for future

expansion. Enough land should be available for locating the EMU cum MEMU

shed. Alternatives identified by RITES for locating EMU cum MEMU shed:

BYPLN: In BYPLN marshalling yard, Railway land is available as already

brought out. However, this land is proposed to be reserved for 3rd

coaching terminal which is also an important. In fact, it is not only for

CRS, even in the long term interests of long distance passengers also, 3rd

coaching terminal is required. It is worth noting that Railway Board has

been asking S W Railway to make arrangements to start new services.



But due to capacity constraints at Bangalore, public demand for more

than 30 such new trains remains unmet on date. Therefore, earmarking

BYPLN for any activity other than coaching terminal is not considered

advisable. 3rd coaching terminal and EMU shed together are not feasible

at this area.

Hejjala: Some railway land is available between Kengeri and Hejjala

stations of MYS line. This land may be suitable for immediate

requirement. But, expansion of facilities in future may not be feasible as

the extent of land available is less. Moreover, this is the only piece of

railway land available in this section for developing 4th coaching terminal

which is another essential component of implementing CRS for

Bangalore. Not only for CRS, even otherwise also, a coaching terminal

on MYS section is very much essential in the long term interests of the

Railway. Therefore, it is recommended to earmark this land for 4th

coaching terminal.

BAND: Some Railway land is available on either side of BAND yard. This

can be developed into EMU shed. However, acquisition of a small patch

of land (about an acre or so) may be required. Another feature worth

noting is that there exists a road in Railway land (Lingarajapuram area i.e.

other than station building side). Implications of closing this road may

need to be reviewed.

CSDR: Channasandra yard also has got enough Railway land on main

road side to accommodate EMU shed. However, this needs heavy

cutting of earth work.

Km 8 – 9 (CSDR – YNK): At this location, Railway land enough to

accommodate an EMU shed is available. If EMU shed is constructed

here, it need to be connected to CSDR yard which is about 4 Km away.

When the issue is discussed with Divisional Officers, it was felt that EMU

shed at BAND is operationally more convenient compared to CSDR or

Km 8-9.

Therefore, EMU shed may be constructed at BAND.



6.3.7 Extension of Trains: Multi Terminals on MYS section

Number of trains getting terminated at SBC do not need any maintenance i.e.

they do not need any terminal facilities like pit lines etc. These trains are lying

over at SBC for durations as high as 11:55 hours (Details at Annexure-1).

Good number of such trains can be extended into MYS section and can be

terminated at Kengeri, Hejjala, Bidadi, Ramanagara, Channapatna, Maddur and

Mandya. What is required at those stations is just one platform line which can

be easily constructed. Even if one train is terminated at each of these stations, 7

to 10 trains can be terminated in SBC-MYS section. The relief it brings to SBC

is just immense in terms of commuter capacity addition. The trains thus

extended shall also serve as commuter trains from SBC up to that terminal.

However, this arrangement has some logistic problems for S W Railway.

Arranging crew for operating these trains at isolated locations may pose

additional burden on S W Railway. Alternate stations are recommended

additional lines and PFs to deal CRS trains. S W Railway may weigh the

operational ease Vs logistic problems and make appropriate operations plan.

6.3.8 Hejjala 4th Coaching Terminal

As already brought above, Mumbai has got many terminals like CSTM, Dadar,

LTT, Kalyan, Mumabi Central, Thane etc. Unless so many terminals are

planned like this, dispersion of traffic shall be a big problem.

Developing many coaching terminals may pose additional burden on S W

Railway. But keeping in view the ever growing demand for long distance and

CRS trains, if alternate terminals are not developed like this, probably it may not

be possible to accommodate any public demand either for a new local train or

for a long distance train.

Developing an exclusive 4th coaching terminal in MYS section is strategically

important to disperse the sub-urban traffic effectively and for seamless

functioning of CRS. Trains coming from BYPL side can be conveniently taken

onto MYS section and can be terminated at Hejjala.



Between Kengeri and Hejjala of Mysore section, there is some Railway

land available at about Km 20-21.

In this land, about 6 pit lines can be easily constructed.

All these lines can be connected to Hejjala station.

This land is very strategically located near the track and can be best used

for enhancing the capacity of overall rail system of Bangalore.

This can be fully developed into coaching terminal and some trains can

be terminated here.

On date, public demands for starting more than 30 new trains from

Bangalore remain unmet due to capacity constraints at SBC. Majority of

those requests can be conceded with Hejjala terminal.

The land available can facilitate a small terminal. If some more land can

be acquired adjacent to the available land, this terminal also can be

developed for a capacity like SBC or BYPL (North) or YPR.

Alternatively GoK and SWR can form a team to identify any other location

where land can be acquired for 4th coaching terminal in Mysore section.

Image showing typical arrangement is as under:

Figure: 6.5 Hejjala 4th coaching terminal

It is highly recommended to develop all the four terminals (Binny Mill, BYPLN,

BAND and Hejjala) as discussed above.

6.3.9 Freight Terminals

On date, there exists only one freight terminal (SGT) near Whitefield on

Bangalore CRS. For the present level of freight traffic, existing facilities are

good enough. However, as the freight traffic increases, movement of freight



trains from all direction to SGT badly occupies the sections and net capacity for

commuter trains shall come down. Therefore, some more freight terminals

need to be developed in Bangalore area in future. Probably, one freight

terminal in the north will be required first in DBU area. Then some more freight

terminals in south and west can be planned depending on growth in freight

traffic. The new freight terminals should be developed as multimodal logistic

hubs providing one stop logistic solutions to customers. On date, Bangalore

City does not have such terminals.

However, additional freight terminals are not warranted immediately to introduce

CRS trains as brought out in “Demand Supply Assessment” chapter.

6.4 Sectional Strategies

6.4.1 Unidirectional Traffic in Mornings and Evenings

In the morning time, long distance trains keep arriving Bangalore. During that

time, Down line (Bangalore Cantonment to SBC) is fully occupied and there will

be hardly any slot left over to run commuter trains. This is the time where

commuter trains also need to be run in this direction. During this time, trains in

opposite direction are comparatively less and thus the Up line is underutilised.

The situation becomes reverse in evenings when long distance trains start from

SBC and commuter trains also are to start from SBC. This phenomenon

causes hurdle to commuter trains as well as long distance trains. Any small

hitch anywhere hits series of trains. To address this issue:

Signalling system should be changed in SBC-BNC. Conventional up line

and down line system should be replaced by twin single line system so

that both lines can deal trains of both directions.

Presently Bangalore Cantt – Baiyyappanahalli block section is 6.46 km

length. A train can be dispatched from BNC towards BYPL only after

previous train reaches BYPL. This 6.46 km block section can be

converted into 3 blocks of 2 Km each by providing automatic block

signalling. Similarly, K R Puram – Whitefield 9.32 Km block section also



can be converted into 4 blocks by changing the signalling to automatic

signalling.

The above cited solutions effectively tackle the morning and evening rush of

unidirectional traffic so that commuter trains do not get affected due to the

unidirectional rush.

Same unidirectional traffic congestion is experienced in SBC-YPR section also.

In the morning, many long distance trains keep coming from TK side to SBC

and these trains have to go in opposite direction in the evening. To tackle this

problem, SBC-YPR block section is already provided with twin single line

system. Even with this arrangement also, handling peak time rush is posing

operational problems to S W Railway. This problem can be solved by providing

IB (Intermittent Block) signals in both the lines of SBC-YPR for both up and

down directions. After this option is also explored, probably next step would be

quadrupling of SBC-YPR to tackle unidirectional morning and evening rush.

6.4.2 Criss-Cross movements at BYPL: Avoid by Flyovers

BYPL area of Bangalore CRS has very peculiar arrangement. Trains from 5

different directions join here, from Bangarapet, Bangalore, Yelahanka, Hebbal

and Hosur. This type of multi directions at a single area affects the train

operations very badly. This being in heart of urbanisation, commuter trains take

a severe hit in this area. Some trains get more priority at the cost of other

trains. But, in this area all the directions are more or less equally important from

commuter‟s point of view. Basic motto of any commuter system is that public

should be able to reach their work places situated at about 70 to 100 Km within

1 hour. With the type of criss-cross movements at BYPL area, the basic motto

of the commuter system just cannot be thought of. Train movements in this

area criss-cross as under:



Table: 6.8 Criss-cross movements of trains in BYPL area

To → From ↓

Bangarapet Bangalore Yelahanka Hosur Hebbal

Bangarapet - Main Line

Infringes Bangalore-Bangarapet

trains. Flyover

required

No Connection


trains. Flyover

required

Bangalore Main Line - Direct

Connection.

Infringes Bangarapet-Bangalore

trains. Flyover

required

Direct Connection

Yelahanka Direct

Movement


trains. Flyover required (via

Channasandra)

- No

Connection. No Connection

Hosur No Connection Direct

Movement No Connection - Fly over exists

Hebbal Direct

Connection Direct

Connection Direct

Connection Already Fly over exists

-

From the above it can be seen that to avoid criss-cross movements and for

seamless movement of trains in this area, 4 flyovers are required. These

flyovers in order of priority are:

1. Bangalore – Hosur flyover.

2. Bangarapet-Yelahanka Flyover.

3. Bangarapet-Hebbal Flyover.

4. Yelahanka – Bangalore Flyover.

Doubling is in progress in Yelahanka – Baiyyappanahalli section. Bangalore –

Bangarapet is already double line. In future, YPR-BYPL and Banaswadi-Hosur

Doublings will come up. Automatic Signalling is also contemplated for any

commuter rail system. Advantage of these doublings and automatic signalling

goes waste to a large extent in this criss-cross movement area unless these

flyovers are constructed. This is to say that full advantage of the doublings and

automatic signalling cannot be realised without these flyovers.



As per the preliminary feasibility study undertaken, it appears that flyovers at

Serial Number 1, 2 and 3 are prima facie feasible. Flyover at serial number 4

appears to be not feasible due to the presence of another 2 flyovers (one road

fly over connecting Kasturi Nagar and Tin Factory area and another rail flyover

connecting Banaswadi to Hosur).

Presently, 34 trains are making criss-cross movements in BYPL area (Details at

Annexure-2). Out of these, about 25 trains are criss-crossing during commuter

train timings (0500 Hrs. to 2100 Hrs.). In addition, number of un scheduled

trains (goods trains, Light Engines and Departmental Trains etc.) also cross the

main line. With 25 to 35 trains criss-crossing in this area in commuter timings,

it can be imagined how the commuter trains are hit. With the proposed 3

flyovers, 24 out of 34 trains will pass smoothly without any need to regulate

trains on other lines. Balance 10 trains necessitate flyover No 4 which is prima

facie found not feasible. However, as can be seen in Annexure-2, most of

these 10 trains can be terminated at YPR instead of SBC so that criss-cross

movements are avoided at BYPL.

This tremendously boosts up the capacity of the system. In other words, more

commuter trains can be run in all the directions. These types of flyover

arrangements already exist in systems like Mumbai Suburban. Typical

Figure: 6.6 Flyovers at BYPL area



arrangement of flyovers at BYPL area along with skywalk is shown in the

image.

Innovative engineering solutions need to be worked out to construct these

flyovers and skywalk by engaging a separate expert consultant.

Apart from flyovers, quadrupling of SBC – WFD also will give substantial relief

to the train operations to tackle criss-cross movements in BYPL area.

6.4.3 Criss-Cross Movements at YPR

At YPR also, criss-cross movements can eat away the capacity of the system.

Trains criss-cross in this area are as under:

Table: 6.9 Criss-Cross movements of trains at YPR

To → From ↓

Yesvantpur Tumkur Yelahanka Hebbal

Yesvantpur - Direct

Connection Direct

Connection Direct

Connection

Tumkur Direct

Connection -

Direct Connection.

Infringes YPR-HEB line

Yelahanka Direct

Connection Infringes TK-YPR

line -

No Connection exists

Hebbal Direct

Connection

Infringes YPR-YNK line and TK-

YPR line

No connection exists

-

Presently, YPR-LOGH-YNK doubling is in progress. During doubling, both

block sections (YPR-LOGH and LOGH-YNK) should be provided with Twin

Single Line system duly making LOGH as a block station (existing is halt

station) for operational flexibility and increase of capacity. When such a

doubling is done, criss-cross scenario at YPR shall be like:

Table: 6.10 Criss-Cross movements of trains after YNK-YPR doubling

To → From ↓

Yesvantpur Tumkur Yelahanka Hebbal

Yesvantpur - Direct

Connection Direct

Connection Direct

Connection

Tumkur Direct

Connection -

Direct Connection.

Direct Connection

Yelahanka Direct


line -

No Connection exists

Hebbal Direct


line No connection

exists -



Above cited infringements can be avoided by constructing one flyover.

Feasibility of constructing this flyover can be explored with innovative

engineering solutions by engaging experts.

However, criss-cross movements get generated at LOGH. Depending on the

congestion after doubling, necessity and feasibility of flyovers at LOGH should

also be explored in future.

6.4.4 Other Criss-Cross Movements

Apart from Criss-Cross movements at BYPL and YPR area discussed above,

due to presence of Goods Terminal at White Field and Diesel shed in K R

Puram area, so many criss-cross movements take place. After a train is

terminated at SBC, Locomotive comes to diesel shed. After attention, again it

goes to SBC. Similarly, freight trains entering into Bangalore area have to

necessarily come to Goods Terminal at Whitefield for maintenance. All these

cause lot of criss-cross movements in this area.

That means, the trains are subjected to so many obstructions at BYPL, KJM

and WFD and trains virtually crawl from SBC-WFD. If at all any train does not

crawl, it is at the cost of many trains in other directions.

Whitefield and K R Puram areas also need to be analysed thoroughly and

arrangements like flyovers should be planned for seamless movement of trains

in CRS.

In the long run, when the existing rail network‟s potential is fully tapped (or when

Mumbai suburban like situation comes), the goods terminal may need relocation

to some distant place. Or some more goods terminals may need to be

developed in DBU side or TK side or MYS side or so. Similarly, when the entire

area is changed to electrified territory and diesel traction is totally done away

with, the diesel shed needs re-design and/or probably relocation. Therefore,

proposals like flyovers etc. in K R Puram – Whitefield should be planned in the

changed scenario and therefore not contemplated in the present study.



6.4.5 Automatic Signalling

Automatic Signalling allows movement of more trains as seen from:

Table: 6.11 Comparison of Automatic Signalling and Absolute Block System

Absolute Block Signalling

(Existing system) Automatic Signalling

Signals spacing along the track

4 to 6 Km (Distance from one station to another)

2 Km or even less

Train can start After previous train reaches the next

station After previous train passes the

signal ahead

Operation of Signal

Operated by staff as soon as train passes the signal

Gets automatically operated as soon as train passes the signal

From the above, it can be seen that how automatic block signalling boosts up

the capacity of rail system. Mumbai, Chennai and Hyderabad are able to run

local trains because they have automatic signalling. Thus, automatic signalling

is a must to introduce commuter rail system in Bangalore.

As already discussed above, in Bangalore – Whitefield area is full of criss-cross

movements. Added to this, there is rush of unidirectional traffic in morning and

evening peak hours. Therefore, trains in this section may crawl specially when

more trains are introduced. Capacity of this section needs to be increased on

top most priority by automatic signalling or IB signals or Twin Single Line

system as already discussed.

Subsequently, the automatic signalling should be extended to all other sections

also as under:

1. Bangalore – Whitefield

2. Whitefield – Bangarapet

3. Bangalore-Mysore (along with full doubling and electrification)

4. Yeshvantpur – Tumkur (along with electrification)

5. Baiyyappanahalli – Yelahanka – Dodballapur (along with doubling)

6. Banaswadi – Hosur (along with doubling and electrification)

7. Soldevanahalli – Kunigal (line under construction)



Automatic signalling normally requires a gradient of 1 in 80 or flatter. Some

sections in Bangalore CRS area (especially MYS section) have steeper

gradients. Strategies that are worth exploring to address the gradients issue

are:

Detailed field survey is to be done to ascertain the feasibility of easing the

gradients.

Gradients are a limitation for automatic signalling from freight trains

operation point of view. Therefore, it can be considered to impose some

restrictions on goods train operations like “block section should be

considered as one section only for freight trains whereas the block

section can be considered as many sections as permitted by automatic

signalling in case of EMUs and other non-suburban trains”.

Twin single line systems or IBs can be introduced in select block sections

(like SBC-BNC etc.).

To decide on exact strategies for each section or sub section, detailed field

surveys and studies are to be undertaken. When the projects are sanctioned by

IR, normally IR studies all these aspects before deciding the signalling

arrangements.

6.4.6 Speeds on Loop Lines

Traditionally, trains are run with 15 Kmph on loop lines. But, IR has identified it

as mission area to increase speed to 30 Kmph on all loop lines. Wherever it is

not yet increased to 30 Kmph, it should be done on top priority so that CRS gets

benefited.

6.4.7 Electrification and Doubling

Commuter system cannot serve the public meaningfully with single line. All the

sections of the CRS should necessarily be double lines. Also the tracks should

be electrified. Diesel traction adds to the already polluted urban environment.

Partly diesel and partly electric traction imposes severe restrictions on

operations and seamless movement of trains is not possible. Without full



electrification, EMUs cannot be introduced in all sections. Maintenance of

diesel locomotives and electric locomotives need different facilities.

Maintenance of DEMUs and EMUs/MEMUs also need different facilities.

Therefore, with full electrification, lot of duplication of maintenance infrastructure

and operational infrastructure can be avoided. Such saved infrastructure shall

be better used for increasing capacity of CRS.

Number of electrification projects and doubling projects are already sanctioned

by Indian Railways in CRS area and they are in different stages of execution.

Still number of sections needs sanction of doublings and electrification to make

the CRS fully electrified double lines. Details are:

Table: 6.12 Electrification & Doubling projects

Doubling Electrification

Sanctioned (in order of priority for

execution)

To be sanctioned (in order of priority)

Sanctioned (in order of priority for

execution)

To be sanctioned (in order of priority)

1. Yeshvantpur – Yelahanka (13 Km)

2. Yelahanka – Channasandra (14 Km)

3. Ramanagara- Mysore (94 Km)

1. Yelahanka – Dodballapur (22 Km)

2. Yeshvantpur – Baiyyappanahalli (18 Km)

3. Banaswadi – Hosur (54 Km)

4. Yelahanka – Chikballapur (47 Km)

5. Soldevanhalli – Kunigal (45.2 Km)

1. Kengeri – Mysore (126 Km)

2. Yeshvantpur – Yelahanka (13 Km)

3. Yelahanka – Channasandra (14 Km)

4. Yelahanka – Dodballapur (22 Km)

5. Yeshvantpur -Chikbanavar (8 Km)

1. Bangalore - Yeshvantpur - Tumkur (70 Km).

2. Soldevanhalli – Kunigal (45.2 Km)

3. Yeshvantpur - Banaswadi – Hosur (along with doubling) (67 Km)

4. Yelahanka – Chikballapur (along with doubling) (47 Km)

The sanctioned projects should be executed as per the priority and new projects

also need be taken up for introducing commuter trains in Bangalore.

6.4.8 Minimizing goods trains on commuter lines

If running one goods train is reduced in any section, more than 2 additional

commuter trains can be run on that section. That is the kind of resources a

goods train consumes. To the possible extant, goods trains are not normally

run during commuter timings. However, running goods trains in commuter

timings cannot be totally avoided. These unscheduled trains hamper the



running of commuter trains as well as long distance trains. Therefore, to

minimize the effect of goods trains on CRS routes, the following

recommendations are made:

A by-pass line (about 25 Km) before YNK: Trains coming from

Dodballapur going to Jolarpettai can go to Chikballapur, Kolar and

Bangarapet. (Chikballapur – Kolar gauge conversion is in progress).

Train need not touch YNK or BYPL or SBC-BWT line at all. If the traffic

so warrants, such bypass can also be replaced by a flyover after DBU

side and CBP side doublings are done.

Figure: 6.7 Connecting Dodballapur line with Chikballapur line

Presently goods trains which are to go from DBU side to HSRA side are

being taken to YPR, engine getting reversed and taken to HEB and then

to HSRA. A direct connection from YNK to HEB avoids such engine

reversals and also YPR gets relieved. This creates additional capacity at

YPR. Such connection from YNK to HEB may need to pass through

heavily built up area. Alignment should be fixed carefully and

meticulously for this connection so that relocation of structures shall be

least. Until such bypass line comes, LOGH should be made as junction

station with some loop lines so that trains from YNK need not go to YPR

for engine reversals.



Freight train movements on CRS should be planned only during off peak

hours especially during nights. In fact, South Western Railway has been

already adopting this strategy to some extent or other.

6.4.9 Level Crossings – The Speed Breakers of the System:

Trains have to observe the signals at Level Crossings and stop if required.

When running a train at every 10 minutes or even less is contemplated, level

crossings become seriously critical in the system. They need to be eliminated

by ROBs/RUBs or so. More the manned Level Crossings in a section, more

the running time of the trains. Average spacing of manned level crossings in

CRS area are:

Table: 6.13 Average spacing of Level Crossings in CRS area

Section Length (Kms) Average spacing of

manned Level Crossings (Kms)

YPR-YNK 12.45 1.78

YPR-BYPL 16.11 1.79

YNK-DBU 20.72 1.88

SBC-MYA 92.88 2.32

BYPL-HSRA 48.59 2.56

YNK-BYPL 16.12 2.69

YNK-TK 64.00 2.78

YNK-CBP 46.05 4.61

SBC-YPR 5.35 5.35

Apart from spacing of manned level crossings, traffic at each of these level

crossings also affect the train operations. More the TVUs (Train Vehicle Units),

more is the average running time of the trains. TVUs of LCs in CRS area can

be appreciated as under:

Table: 6.14 Number of Level Crossings & TVUs in CRS area

Section

Distance

(Kms)

Manned Level Crossings with TVUs

Total From To

Greater

than 4

lakh

Between

3 to 4

lakhs

Between

2 to 3

lakhs

Between

1 to 2

lakhs

Between

50000 and

1 lakh

Between

25000 and

50000

Less than

25000

SBC BWT 70.21 2 3 1 3

1 4 14

SBC MYA 92.88 2

1 4 3 3 26 39



Section

Distance

(Kms)

Manned Level Crossings with TVUs

Total From To

Greater

than 4

lakh

Between

3 to 4

lakhs

Between

2 to 3

lakhs

Between

1 to 2

lakhs

Between

50000 and

1 lakh

Between

25000 and

50000

Less than

25000

SBC YPR 5.35

1

1

YPR TK 64.00 1

3 5 2 12 23

YPR YNK 12.45

1 3 1 1

6

YPR BYPL 16.11

1 3 3 5 12

YNK DBU 20.72 1

1 1 6 2 11

YNK CBP 46.05

1 1

1 7 10

YNK BYPL 16.12 1

1 2 1 1 6

BYPL HSRA 48.59

3 3 4 9 19

Total → 7 3 4 20 19 22 66 141

Details of Level Crossings with TVUs more than 50000 are at Annexure-10

Level crossing becomes unmanageable and severely affects the train as well as

road operations if the TVU exceeds about 100000. How a train will be able to

maintain its speed with the level crossings with heavy TVUs and with less

average spacing as seen above is anybody‟s guess. Suburban trains should be

run at 5 to 10 minute frequency. How can a gate with 4 Lakh TVUs be opened

and closed once in 5 to 10 minutes. It is difficult even to think of. In commuter

train operations, every minute counts. Even a couple of minutes early/late

matters for the commuters. Therefore, these manned level crossings should

be replaced by ROB/RUBs on top most priority in the interest of commuter train

operations. By replacing the level crossings with ROB/RUBs, commuters

travelling by roads also save lot of time.

Unmanned level crossings per se do not affect train operations. Unmanned

level crossings are to be eliminated on safety considerations rather than speed

considerations. Indian Railways have already identified elimination of

unmanned level crossings as their mission area.

Present arrangement of replacing level crossings by ROB/RUB is very age old

arrangement. Railway executes the portion near to the track and the



approaches get executed by local bodies. Due to co-ordinating problems and

due to land problems, construction is taking too long time. ROBs sanctioned in

CRS area on date are:

Table: 6.15 ROBs sanctioned in CRS area

Year of Sanction No of LCs

00-01 3

06-07 2

07-08 1

09-10 8

10-11 3

11-12 1

12-13 6

Total → 24

The snail pace of ROB‟s execution deters the planners to sanction new ROB

projects. At this pace, elimination of more than 100 Level crossings in CRS

area just cannot be thought of. A few things worth noting are:

Jharkhand government entrusted the work of construction of 14 Road

Over Bridges including the work of approaches to the Railways. Railways

awarded the entire work to KRCL on turnkey basis (Estimated Cost: Rs.

163 Crores) in 2003-04. Though KRCL faced delays on account of delay

in handing over of land free of encumbrances, removal of encroachments,

relocation of utilities and adverse law and order situation etc., the works

on all the ROBs were completed in 2009-105.

Indian Railways proposed to set up a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV)

named Rail-Road Grade Separation Corporation6.

The above issues are brought out here just to reiterate the seriousness of the

issue of level crossings. Like Jharkhand Government, GoK also may consider

entrusting ROBs execution (or at least critical ROBs) to one agency.

5 http://www.konkanrailway.com/node/610

6 Hon’ble Minister for Railways Sri Dinesh Trivedi’s 12-13 Railway Budget Speech



6.4.10 Quadrupling

With the above cited measures, on all commuter sections (double line sections),

trains can be run at about 10 minutes frequency during peak hours. However,

such running can be made comfortable and also enhanced further (to 5 minutes

frequency or so), by having an exclusive corridor for commuters. Wherever

quadrupling is not feasible due to land problems or so, at least tripling can be

done in those stretches. With this, 2 lines (1 line in case of triple line) can be

earmarked exclusively for commuter trains. Priorities of quadrupling:

1. SBC - WFD (from congestion point of view).

2. BYPL-HSRA (as this section constitutes about 1/3 of commuter

demand of Bangalore area).

3. SBC-YPR-Tumkur

4. SBC-MYS

5. White Field – Bangarapet.

6.5 Station Strategies

6.5.1 Additional Lines and other facilities at CRS Stations

With the implementation of CRS, every station has to cater for stoppage of

more number of trains. With EMUs, every station can act as terminal. Ideally,

an exclusive platform should be nominated for commuter trains at every station.

Therefore, 1 or 2 additional lines and platforms should be provided at least at

alternate stations of the CRS stations. One of the platforms can be even dead

end platform so that it will be earmarked exclusively to terminate/originate

EMUs. These additional lines can also be used for stabling EMU rakes during

nights and weekends. Other facilities like foot over bridges, ticketing windows,

vending stalls, parking space etc. should be created (or upgraded) at each

station.

6.5.2 Additional halts on CRS

More the halts in CRS, the better it will serve the public. Ideally:



City core area (lying within 15 km radius from SBC): Here population

density is more and very 1.5 Km or so, there can be a halt.

Area lying between 15 to 30 Km of SBC: Here, population density is

moderate and every 2.5 Km or so, there can be a halt.

Beyond about 30 Km of SBC: Population density is relatively less and

every 3 to 4 Km, there can be a halt.

Spacing of stations in Mumbai, the role model for any CRS in India is as under:

Table: 6.16 Spacing of stations in Mumbai Suburban Rail System

Spacing of Stations

Stations in Quadruple lines with Automatic

Signalling (Mumbai)

Stations in Double Line with

Automatic Signalling (Mumbai)

Stations in Double Line with

conventional Signalling

(Bangalore CRS)

Stations in Single Line with

conventional Signalling

(Bangalore CRS)

Less than 1 Km 3 4%

3 4%

0 0%

0 0%

1 to 2 Km 21 29%

12 18%

1 2%

0 0%

2 to 3 Km 8 11%

9 14%

5 13%

2 9%

More than 3 Km 41 56%

42 64%

33 85%

20 91%

Total → 73 100%

66 100%

39 100%

22 100%

From the above, it can be seen that Bangalore needs good number of additional

halts.

However, provision of more halts has limitations as under:

Single Line cannot provide more halts. Line should necessarily be a

double line to provide more halts.

Absolute block system of signalling (present system of Bangalore CRS)

cannot provide more halts. Automatic signalling facilitates more halts.

EMU rakes take very less time for acceleration, deceleration and also for

passengers to entrain/detrain. With normal passenger rakes, more halts

is not feasible. All commuter rakes should be made EMU rakes before

increasing number of halts.



Additional halts reduce the average speed of the trains. Hence all

activities to boost average speeds should be completed before additional

halts are introduced.

Provision of adequate length of platforms, FOBs, ticketing counters,

parking space etc. should be feasible at these halts.

Feeder roads should be feasible and should be developed for every halt.

Space for developing a bus halt is also required.

There need to be habitations nearby so that the new halt gets patronised.

Land should be available for all these facilities for establishing a new halt.

While acquiring the land, it needs to be planned for 20 coach trains

though, that much lengthier trains are not proposed now. This goes a

long way to enhance the CRS capacity in future.

Presently there are about 64 halts in the CRS area of about 440 Km. As felt

necessary by public and various voluntary organisations, another about 45 halts

are required in the CRS area (List at Annexure - 3). However, the list does not

cover the additional halts of full CRS area. These additional halts and even

more can be made possible provided the issues brought out above are

addressed and a detailed field survey is done duly covering above cited

aspects.

6.6 Directional Strategies for Terminating Trains

Existing terminals SBC and YPR have got certain natural convenience to deal

trains of particular direction as shown under:

Table: 6.17 Directional Convenience of Terminals

Trains from (direction) Convenient Terminal

DBU YPR

BWT SBC

HSRA YPR and SBC

MYS SBC

TK YPR

CBP YPR



If a train from DBU is terminated at SBC instead of YPR, extra time taken is

about 15 to 25 minutes. Similarly, if a train from BWT side is taken to YPR

instead of SBC, it takes about 15 to 25 minutes extra. This aspect is not

considered in the present time-table. With the result, both the terminals are

dealing trains from virtually all directions. If the time table is changed making

the terminals strictly as per the above cited directions:

Running time of most of the long distance trains come down by 15 to 25

minutes.

Many criss-cross movements specially at BYPL area can be avoided and

number of additional paths can be created in all sections to facilitate

running additional trains.

6.7 Commuters Handling Strategies at Stations

With implementation of CRS, number of commuters to be handled at each of

the stations will go up. Handling the commuter rush especially in peak time is

an important issue that need to be addressed. The issue can be addressed by

appropriately designing feeder roads, circulating area, separate parking for 4

wheelers & 2 wheelers, foot over bridges at appropriate locations, escalators at

some important stations, earmarking a couple of platforms exclusively for

commuter trains at important stations like YPR and YNK etc.

SBC is the most critical station from commuters handling consideration.

Currently, SBC station is mainly geared for handling non suburban passengers.

As seen from trend of present commuters movement earlier in this report, SBC

has to handle maximum number of commuters compared to all other stations of

CRS. Here, in peak time i.e. in mornings and evenings, passengers of long

distance trains and commuter trains add up to a big number posing big

challenge to the planners. Even with the present level of passengers, SBC is

felt inadequate and congested. Hence, a CRS commuter would have difficulty

in using the service at SBC for:

Station is too large



Mix up with long distance passengers

Inadequate availability of public transport

Confusion across large number of platforms

A commuter needs a well-integrated, faster and simple terminal access (not like

long distance passenger who does not mind spending even 30 minutes extra

moving from one platform to another etc.). Hence it would be preferable to

develop a new terminal exclusively for CRS users.

RITES surveyed the surrounding open areas - both railway and non-railway

lands, to locate the terminal. While available railway land is not sufficient to

provide the terminal, open land vacated by the Binny Mills, lying abutting the

railway land is most promising. The terminal can be located at this place with

ease of access to the railway station. The place also has road access and thus

it can be designed into a multimodal terminal.

This can also be connected to the Mysore line directly as it lies towards the

Mysore end. The terminal would connect to other directions also suitably.

Therefore, it is suggested to develop an exclusive commuters handling area

(platforms, foot over bridges, feeder roads etc.) in Binny Mills Land.

6.8 Rakes for Commuter Trains

6.8.1 Types of Rakes

Presently, commuter trains are being run in Bangalore using 4 MEMU/DEMU

rakes and 10 normal passenger rakes. Features of various rakes:

Table: 6.18 Comparison of Various types of rakes

Normal Passenger Rakes MEMU/DEMU Rakes EMU rakes

Average Speed (KMPH)

36.8@ 38.5# 40.2@

Engine Reversal Required Not Required Not Required

Terminal Detention

30 minutes to 1 Hr or even more

10 to 20 minutes 5 to 10 minutes

Width of Coach 10 feet 10 feet 12 feet

Rake Design They are made for

normal long distance travel. Toilets,

It is nothing but normal passenger rake except the interior seating. Seating is

Made especially for commuter travel with more space for standing, no toilets, wider



Normal Passenger Rakes MEMU/DEMU Rakes EMU rakes

arrangements for luggage, lying down etc.

are available.

changed to suit sitting passengers.

entry/exit etc.

Suitability Suitable to run on any

existing sections Suitable to run on any

existing sections

Platforms and other structures along the route need to be

checked and modified/changed wherever

required due to its more width

Provision of Toilets

Provided Not generally provided Not provided

Entrain / Detrain

Narrow entries and very uncomfortable if more

passengers need to entrain/detrain at a time

More or less same as normal passenger rakes

Wider entries and passengers can entrain and detrain very

fast

Capacity

Normal Sitting : 80 Over Crowding : Very

uncomfortable for standing

Normal Sitting : 100 Typical Over Crowding :

200 to 250

Normal sitting : 120 Over Crowding : 300 to 350

Cost Lower

About 50 to 60% higher than normal passenger

rakes. About 10 to 20% lower

than EMUs

Higher

Overall Low Transit Systems Medium transit systems Mass Rapid Transit Systems @Source : Indian Railways Year Book 2010-11

# Speed is taken average of Normal passenger and EMU rakes

6.8.2 Three Car Vs Four Car Rakes

EMUs and MEMUs can be in 3 car or 4 car units. Out of 3 or 4 cars in a

unit, one car is motor or engine car and others are trailing cars.

Due to more powering, 3 car units have more accelerations/decelerations

and more speeds and thus better turn around. Selection of 3 car or 4 car

makes good lot of difference specially when the routes have steeper

gradients like in case of SBC-MYS section.

When the CRS trains get patronised, the rakes get overloaded beyond

normally designed for. In Mumbai, one EMU car carries more than 600

commuters in peak time against its seating capacity of about 120 or so. 4

car units cannot handle such over loadings due to less powering.

Average cost per car of 3 car rake is about 8% to 12% higher than that of

4 car rake.



6.8.3 Other features of Rakes

Earlier design of EMUs were with DC motors. Latest design is with 3

phase AC motors. This latest design consumes 33% less energy

compared to earlier design.

In latest design, the conventional body is changed to stainless steel body.

GPS based commuter information system is also a part of latest EMU

design.

General look, feel and seating arrangements etc. are constantly under up

gradation.

6.8.4 RITES recommendations on Rakes

DEMU/MEMUs are not meant for mass transit. They are medium transit

systems. EMU is specially designed for mass transit system. EMU

capacity is theoretically 20% more than DEMU/MEMUs. Practically, their

capacity is even 50% more considering standing commuters,

overcrowding etc. Ultimately, any mass transport urban system has to

switch over to EMUs.

Mumbai MRVC is using EMUs. Even Hyderabad MMTS, initially planned

for MEMUs. Later on, realising the limitations of MEMU/DEMUs, they

switched over to 3 car EMUs. This change in planning resulted in some

infructuous expenditure also.

Thus, EMU rakes are best suited for commuter operations.

However, routes where EMUs are to be run need special survey and

attention especially with reference to tracks spacing and platform heights

and lengths. Such attention is required only in CRS network of about 440

Km (where EMUs are proposed to be run).

Therefore, it is suggested to go for 16 car MEMUs for trains presently

serving commuters but travelling beyond the CRS (like trains to MYS,

MKM or so) and 15 car EMUs for trains going to ply within CRS area.

Cost estimates are also made accordingly.

Different features discussed above come with correspondingly higher

costs. EMUs normal life is about 35 years. It may be even over used by



5 to 10 years depending on the financial position at that time. There will

be so many up gradations during these 35 to 40 years. Such up

gradations cannot be effected for old rakes. Therefore it is recommended

to go for 3 car rakes with latest design even if they cost more. Cost

implications of different designs of rakes are discussed in “Phasing &

Cost Estimates” chapter.

Typical photographs of an EMU rake of MRVC are as under:

Figure: 6.8 EMU rake of MRVC

Maintenance facilities required for EMU rakes and normal passenger

rakes are different. Therefore, apart from procuring rakes, maintenance

facilities are to be developed for these rakes. Therefore, EMU

maintenance facilities are suggested to be provided at Banaswadi as

discussed in above paragraphs.

6.9 Train Operation Plan

6.9.1 Parameters

The operating plan for suburban system would be dictated by the available

capacity and type of trains run and the type of traffic different types of the day.

6.9.2 Capacity and Traffic Mix

A fully commissioned CRS (i.e. after implementing various phases suggested in

this report) shall be a close clone of Mumbai‟s suburban system barring a few

differences as under:



Mumbai‟s main terminals (CSTM and CCG) are dead end terminals

whereas SBC and YPR are passing through terminals connecting many

directions.

Mumbai is mostly linear system whereas Bangalore is a star like system.

CRS need to take care of criss-cross movements at BYPL, YPR etc. On

this count, Bangalore has less operational flexibility compared to Mumbai.

Mumbai has mostly quadruple lines whereas Bangalore will have double

lines.

Headway in Mumbai is 3 to 4 minutes due to quadruple lines. But in

Bangalore, it will be about 8 to 10 minutes due to double line.

This 8 to 10 minutes headway need further moderation considering

efficiency factor.

Thus, in an hour, about 6 trains can be run in Bangalore. These include

commuter trains, long distance trains, freight trains, empty trains,

departmental trains, provision for maintenance blocks etc. etc.

Typically, these 6 to 8 trains per hour = 1.0 x No of commuter Trains + 1.5 x No of Long Distance Trains + 2.5 x No of freight trains + 1.0 x No of Departmental Trains + Maintenance provision.

The above calculation is shown assuming one long distance train as

equal to 1.5 times the commuter train and one freight train as equal to 2.5

times the commuter train. This is considered because, these trains

occupy more path when compared to commuter trains.

6.9.3 Operations Plan

Suburban and Non Suburban travellers have different patterns of travel. Long

distance travellers expect to arrive in the morning, say between 5.30 and 8, and

depart late in the evening say 1900 to 2200 hours. However, these travellers

are not as sensitive to time as the suburban travellers are and thus little more

flexibility is permitted with these trains.

The suburban travellers have a different peak travel pattern – they like to rush in

before offices open and rush out when offices close. In Mumbai, on the Central



Railway, morning peak is 0800 to 1100 hrs. arriving Chhatrapati Shivaji

Terminus (CSTM) and evening peak is 1700 hrs. to 2000 hrs. departing from

CSTM while on the Western Railway system it follows morning peak from 0830

to 1130 hrs. arriving at Churchgate and evening peak of 1730 to 2030 hrs.

departing from Churchgate.

In addition to the peak, the day can be split into off peak and lean. Lean period

will be from 2300 to 0500 hrs. and the remaining 12 hours being off peak hours.

Frequency of trains during peak can be 10 minutes, during off peak 15-20

minute frequency, and during the lean period will be every 45 minutes or 1 hour.

Typical potential for headway for Bangalore CRS trains is as under:

Table: 6.19 Typical Potential for headway of CRS Trains

Phase

Peak period

(800 to 1100 &

1700 to 2000)

Off peak period

(Remaining 12

hours)

Lean period

(23-5)

To start with 20 Minutes 30 Minutes A maximum of 1 every

hour subject to demand

and needs of maintenance

blocks

After the system gets

stabilised and

patronage picked up

10 Minutes 20 Minutes

A detailed time tabling of these schedules will have to be done to see how each

sector is served but it is beyond the scope of this report. Hourly distribution of

potential number of CRS trains that can be run after the CRS is implemented is

given at Annexure 9. This annexure is made duly considering the present

scheduled trains and making a suitable provision for non-scheduled trains,

freight trains, maintenance blocks etc.

6.9.4 Integrating Present and Future services

Present services being run are broadly categorised as:

– Services originating and terminating within CRS area. These can be

conveniently replaced by EMUs. From Annexure 4, it can be seen

that 12 services can be replaced by EMUs.

– Services run in CRS area, but originate/terminate a little beyond CRS

area. These can be conveniently replaced by MEMUs. From



Annexure 4, it can be seen that 18 services can be replaced by

MEMUs.

– Services run in CRS area, but originate/terminate far beyond CRS

area. These are mostly long distance trains. These services cannot

be replaced by MEMU/EMUs. They are to be left as it is.

Hour wise beak up of existing services (total trains as well as trains serving

commuters) are given in Annexures 7 and 8 respectively. These annexure

indicate that during the morning and evening peak periods of 0800 to 1100 hrs.

and 1700 to 2000 hrs., except in two sections all others have 4 or fewer trains.

Even the lone exception of SBC-BYPL-BWT section has 5 trains. Thus,

retaining the existing services intact, it is possible to meet the peak services of

the CRS as hourly capacity of fully developed system is going to be 7 to 8.

Hourly distribution of possibility of running additional commuter services after

implementing CRS is given at Annexure-9. This annexure considers

reasonable allowance for running goods trains, departmental trains,

maintenance blocks etc.

6.9.5 Stabling of EMU and MEMU Rakes

At any moment, normally about 10% to 20% of the total rakes will be under

maintenance in EMU sheds. Balance rakes are under run. However, majority

of the rakes are stabled in nights and on weekends as less number of services

are run. 10% to 20% of rakes are always under run whether during nights or on

weekends. Thus, stabling arrangements are required for about 75% of the

rakes. Plan for stabling rakes is a part of detailed time tabling of services by S

W Railway and any study like the present one cannot attempt to draw stabling

plans. However, sufficiency of the infrastructure to facilitate stabling is

discussed as under:

It is recommended to procure 5 MEMU rakes and 26 EMU rakes under

various phases.



M(EMU Rakes: 3 or 4 rakes (out of 5 rakes) may need to get stabled in

nights and weekends. These 4 rakes can be stabled at any of the far end

terminals i.e. MYS, MKM, and KPN.

EMU Rakes: Out of 26 EMU rakes, any time 3 to 4 rakes will be in EMU

shed. 3 to 4 rakes will be under run even during nights and weekends.

Additional 2 lines proposed at each of the 7 terminals (MYA, TK, HSRA,

DBU, CBP, BWT, and Kunigal) and one additional line at various other

stations can be used to stable the balance EMU rakes when not in run. In

addition, some stabling lines that exist in YNK, some more stabling lines

proposed at BYPLN, and proposed exclusive coaching terminal in Binny

Mill land also can be used to stable good number of EMU rakes.

6.10 Enhancement – A continuous activity

Capacity enhancement of existing rail network has been brought out above

sections. However, the mission of commuter rail shall not stop there. It is a

continues process to enhance capacity and to extend the rail network to new

geographical areas to keep in pace with growing public needs.

MRVC in its phase II and phase III plans, made proposals to extend the network

to new areas which Indian Railways cannot do with its resources.

New line work of Bangalore – Satyamangalam is sanctioned by Indian

Railways. After that line is constructed, commuter services can be

planned and extended for about 70Km (up to Kanakapura or Sathanur or

so).

Baiyyappanahalli – Vimanpura abandoned line can also be restored for

running commuter services.

Ring rail can be developed one at 40 Km radius and another at 60 to 70

Km radius from SBC so that entire Bangalore city area gets covered by

rail system.

Developing 5th and 6th coaching terminals (in DBU route and TK route

respectively) to keep in pace with growing demand also adds to

commuter capacity of the CRS system.



Freight terminals in DBU and TK routes can be developed. These

terminals are to be planned as multi modal logistic hubs providing one

stop logistics solution to the customers.

An Air Port link can also be developed instead of costly alternative like

High Speed Rail Link to Air Port.

Suggesting alignments and locations for rail network to new areas need lot of

physical survey specially details about road network, demand pattern and land

availability.

6.11 Airport Connectivity

As desired by client, Airport Connectivity using CRS vis-à-vis Airport

connectivity by metro is discussed hereunder.

The proposed High Speed Rail Link from Cubban park to Air Port (about

33.3 Km) cost about Rs. 8325 Crores (@ Rs 250 crores per Km).

With such an investment, the ridership is estimated at about 40000 per

day (2011) and 98000 (2021)7.

Even with this huge investment, the air travellers from different parts of

the city shall need to travel by CRS or BMTC or any other mode to reach

HSRL station (i.e. either Cubban Road or Hebbal or Yelahanka).

CRS network passes very close to airport. Track between Dodjala and

Devenahalli stations of CBP line is just about 6 Km away from airport. If

this 6 Km track laid, CRS can reach the airport.

Air travellers may stay in any part of the city say HSRA or BWT or DBU or

MYA or so. Travel time for them to reach airport is the most important

criteria for the investment decision.

Travel time for an air traveller to reach Airport with HSRL =

Time from his place of residence to Cubban Road or Hebbal or

Yelahanka station of HSRL by CRS train

(15 Minutes to 1 ½ Hr

+

Time from this HSRL station to reach

airport (15 to 30 minutes

depending on where

= 30 Minutes

to 2 Hrs.

7 DPR for High Speed Rail Link from City Centre to Bangalore International Airport by DMRC (2007)



depending on where he stays on CRS network)

the passenger boards High speed

rail)

Travel Time for an air traveller to reach Airport without High Speed Rail

Link, but by extension of CRS to airport =

Time from his place of residence to Airport on CRS network (via) SBC

or YPR or YNK or so

= 15 Minutes to 2 Hrs. depending on where the passenger stays

Maximum travel time saving due to High Speed Rail link is only for the air

travellers who stay just near to any of the high speed rail stations i.e.

Cubban Road or Hebbal or Yelahanka. For the rest, the travel time

saving may not be substantial and may be even negative in some cases.

Extension of CRS network to airport (about 6 Km) on grade costs less

than Rs 100 Crores. Even if small part of this is required to be taken on

elevated route, then also the costs are far less than the costs

contemplated for HSRL.

In view of the heavy cost implications and in view of the minimal time

advantages to larger air travelling population, it may be worth reviewing

the issue in detail before making any final investment decision.

Savings by such review alone may finance the entire CRS project costing

Rs 8000 to 9000 Crores.

To propose exact alignment of CRS extension to airport (and arriving at to

what extent elevated track is required) and to assess the exact

comparative financial implications, a separate physical feasibility study is

required.

It is worth noting that Hyderabad MMTS phase-II provides for a rail link to

Shamshabad Airport just by extending the existing rail network by about 6

Km.



7 Land – The Game Changer

7.1 Land – The crucial issue

In any highly urbanized area, land definitely is a crucial issue. All big plans and

projects may get struck up when it comes to “land”.

In the context of CRS Bangalore, land issues that can change the game and

that need special attention by GoK are brought out in brief here.

7.2 Land along the Lines

For doublings and triplings, except at few locations, existing Railway land would

suffice. Additional land may need to be acquired at certain locations. Physical

field survey is required to identify the land requirement.

7.3 Land for developing stations – specially new halts on the

CRS

To serve more public, more stations need to be developed in the CRS. For

every such station, land for platforms, ticketing, parking, commercial space etc.

is required. Land is also required to develop the feeder roads to the new

stations and for bus stops. At existing stations, available Railway land may be

mostly sufficient to develop required facilities. However, for developing new

halts, land may need to be acquired.

7.4 Binny Mills Land at SBC yard

If at all there exists one single most important issue that can bring CRS to

Bangalore, it is Binny Mills Land in SBC yard. This land is just a natural

extension of SBC yard and therefore, can be connected to SBC and other rail

network very easily and so naturally. This facilitates construction of additional

platforms exclusively for commuters so that commuters and long distance

passengers will have separate facilities at SBC. This land can also help for

locating lines, platforms, FOBs etc. to deal exclusively commuter trains so that

load on over saturated SBC get relieved which in turn help to run more and



more commuter trains in the entire CRS. Easy connection of SBC yard to MYS

side and thus making almost all lines of SBC universal for receipt/dispatch

from/to any direction is also possible with this land.

It is highly recommended that this land entirely should be made available for

Railways for bringing best CRS to Bangalore. In exceptional difficulties, if part

of this land is spared to Railways, other scaled down options can be explored

wherein capacity additions also shall be accordingly less.

7.4.1 Scenario without Binny Mills Land

To put in simple and plain words: “Without Binny Mill Land, there may not

be CRS”.

Binny Mills Land is recommended for using as an exclusive CRS trains

handling area in this report.

PFs, FOBs etc. of SBC yard are very much congested even with present

level of passengers. With increase in CRS trains, passengers present at

any moment in SBC area will become more and more; and cause

inconvenience to commuters as well as long distance passengers.

Exclusive CRS area in Binny Mills Land will address this issue. Without

Binny Mills Land, passengers handling may be unmanageable at SBC.

For handling commuters on a big scale, double discharge platforms are

ideal. Mumbai has double discharge platforms at important stations like

CSTM, CCG, and Dadar etc. Commuters entrain and detrain the train

from either side of the train (rather than from conventional one side

platform). With double discharge PFs, halt time required for the EMU at

the station will be less. Thus, more trains can be run in a given time.

Such double discharge platforms need more space. With Binny Mills

land, double discharge platforms are possible for commuter trains.

Without this land, concept of “double discharge platforms” may be

probably totally absent in SBC.

To handle passengers on big scale, in case Binny Mill Land is not

available, 2 level PFs may be required i.e. Long Distance trains are to be

dealt on ground floor and commuter trains are to be dealt on First Floor.



Such multi-level PFs are to be connected to all the 3 sides i.e. MYS, YPR

and BYPL side. Such arrangements are not impossible, but costs very

high. SBC yard alone may cost something like Rs. 5000 cores or so.

SBC has to run EMUs in 7 different directions. To start any service in the

early morning to any of these directions, a few EMU rakes needs stabling

at SBC during nights. Without Binny Mill land, it may not be possible to

stable any EMU rake in nights.

Capacity of SBC yard estimated as 150 pairs of trains per day in chapter

6 is based on the assumption of availability of full Binny Mills Land. If all

the remodelling suggested to SBC yard is done without Binny Mills land,

the capacity of SBC yard will be somewhere around 100 to 120 pairs.

The most crucial activity of connecting as many lines as possible of SBC

yard to MYS side reduces the length of various lines considerably in SBC

yard. Repercussions of reduced lengths of lines are already discussed in

this report. To maintain the same length of lines (or to increase) even

after connecting them to MYS side, Binny Mills land is essential.

Ideally, SBC should not have any terminal activities (i.e. pit lines etc.).

But, presence of a couple of pit lines at SBC will be handy in the long

term interests of the system. If Binny Mills land is not present, when all

the existing pit lines are converted into PFs for CRS trains, pit lines will be

totally absent. If any pit line is retained, number of PFs will come down.

With Binny Mills Land, there will be flexibility in redesigning SBC yard duly

retaining a few pit lines so that future train operations have flexibility,

especially with reference to introduction of any new trains. Though

BYPLN 3rd coaching terminal is contemplated, there may be resistance

from public to shift 100% terminating trains (at SBC) to BYPLN. To meet

such eventuality, a few pit lines may need to be retained at SBC. Such

planning needs Binny mills land.

7.4.2 Alternative solutions for Binny Mill land issue

Binny Mill land issue assumes prominence and significance due to the

commercial value it has got.



Therefore, as a trade-off between the rail requirement and commercial

aspects, Binny Mill land can be developed in such a way that ground

space can be earmarked for total railway operations and air space can be

earmarked for commercial activity.

To achieve the above objective, instead of totally transferring the land to

Railways, only part of the land can be transferred to Railways, and in

respect of balance land (road side) only ground space can be leased out

to Railways on nominal lease charges and air space (on road side) can

be commercially exploited. It may be possible to keep even some ground

space on road side for total commercial activity.

With a full-fledged commuter terminal in Binny Mill land, its commercial

value further shoots up and brings some more revenue.

Railway lays down certain stipulations about maximum height of

structures that can be constructed near to railway tracks. Similarly, GoK

has got certain stipulations on the limits of height of buildings. IR and

GoK may need to relax those stipulations to some extent so that optimum

commercial value is realised duly meeting safety norms of Railways.

Thus, an exclusive study of Binny Mill land is required duly integrating:

– Plans of lines, PFs and other commuter facilities.

– Extent of land that can be transferred to Railways and extent of

land that can be leased out to Railways.

– Commercial space that can be created duly considering Railway

stipulations and GoK stipulations.

– While undertaking such survey, SBC yard should be considered in

total rather than exclusive Binny Mill Land.

7.4.3 Scenario with part Binny Mills Land

As already brought out earlier, it is recommended to handover full Binny Mills

land for CRS implementation. However, part facilities can be developed if part

of the land is made available. “Exact facilities possible” Vs “extent of Binny Mills

land” scenarios can be drawn only with detailed physical measurements and

making scaled plans duly interacting with S W Railway. Without detailed



measurements and scaled plans, attempting to draw scenarios may lead to

misleading conclusions in this sensitive issue. However, as insisted by client, it

is attempted to draw scenarios based on the broad discussions with S W

Railway as under:

Table: 7.1 Scenarios Scenario with part Binny Mills Land

Extant of Area Facilities possible

Full (about 29 Acres)

About 5 to 6 PFs, FOBs, etc. can be developed to make it an exclusive

CRS trains handling area so that commuter traffic can be isolated from

long distance passengers as in case of Mumbai

About 15 Acres 2 to 3 PFs and FOB can be developed so that some CRS trains can be

dealt. Balance CRS trains will be dealt in main SBC yard

About 12 Acres 2 stabling lines and 2 pit lines can be developed

About 9 Acres 1 stabling line and 1 pit line can be developed or entry to MYS side can

be given to more lines of SBC yard

About 6 Acres 2 stabling or shunting lines (or 1 pit line) can be developed.

About 3 Acres 1 line is possible to construct. It can be used as shunting neck

Note: For developing commuter terminal, road side land is required to give entry. For facilities like

pit lines and stabling lines alone, road side land may not be essential.

7.5 Land for locating new terminal (4th coaching terminal) in

SBC-MYS section

Developing an exclusive 4th coaching terminal in MYS section is strategically

important for seamless train operations. The land should be ideally within about

20 – 25 Km from SBC. It can be near to any of the existing stations or even

away from station if it can be connected easily to any of the stations. It is

suggested in this report to make use of Railway land available at Hejjala to

develop 4th coaching terminal. However, the land available can make small

coaching terminal and is not enough for a terminal on big scale (like SBC or

YPR or BYPLN). Either additional land should be acquired adjacent to available

land or land at alternate location should be identified to develop full-fledged

coaching terminal in this section. GoK and SWR can form a team to study this

aspect.

7.6 Land for SBC-WFD quadrupling

When CRS gets developed duly implementing various phases recommended in

this report, lines need quadrupling to enhance it further to the level of Mumbai

Suburban rail. SBC-WFD is the first and foremost section that needs



quadrupling. Keeping the importance of this section, this quadrupling was

sanctioned by Indian Railways in 1997 itself. But it has not yet taken off due to

various issues including the land acquisition issues.

7.7 Military Land at YPR

As of now, no major changes are contemplated in YPR, the 2nd coaching

terminal. However, when SBC, 3rd coaching terminal BYPLN and 4th coaching

terminal at Hejjala are exploited fully as recommended in this report, for further

enhancement of Bangalore rail system, YPR may need very critical review. At

that time, the military land available near YPR may need to be spared to

Railways for expansion of YPR terminal activities.

7.8 Land for various ROBs/RUBs construction

Importance of ROB/RUBs for rail as well as road users is already discussed in

“CRS Implementation: Infrastructure Development” chapter. Many ROB works

get held up due to land related problems like in the case of ROB works near

Baiyyappanahalli – Krishnarajapuram areas and near Military gate at

Yesvantpur.

7.9 Land for expansion of rail network to new geographical

areas

Rail network should continuously be expanded to new geographical areas to

meet the ever growing passenger needs specially commuting needs. For

geography like Bangalore, ring rail (one at 40 Km radius and another at about

60 to 70 Km radius from SBC) is an ideal proposition. Fortunately, land is said

to have been already earmarked in master plan for ring rail adjacent to outer

ring road.

7.10 Land for Freight Terminals

On date, there exists only one freight terminal (SGT) near Whitefield on CRS.

For the present level of freight traffic, existing freight facilities are considered

good enough. However, as the freight traffic increases, movement of freight



trains from all directions to SGT badly occupies the sections and net capacity

for commuter trains shall come down. Therefore, in future, some more freight

terminals need to be developed in Bangalore area. Probably, one freight

terminal in DBU area and one in TK area will be required. Land will be required

for these freight terminals.

7.11 Land for various proposals/measures suggested in this

report

Land is required for doublings, flyovers etc. suggested in this report. Detailed

field study is required to assess the total land requirement, land available with

Railways and state government and private land requirement.

7.12 Land Acquisition: The Strategy

Land Acquisition especially in urban area is highly complex and unfortunately

no universally acceptable strategies exist. One thing that can be said for sure

is: Serious and fully dedicated organisational setup exclusively meant for land

acquisition for CRS makes lot of difference on Land Acquisition front.

Managerial as well as technical solutions should be found on case to case basis

to make land acquisition faster. A few news items are brought out here for

appreciation:

An Extract from RTI‟s success story

The state government is a 49 per cent partner in MRVC, the rest being held by ministry of

railways. The government’s twin nominees on the board of directors are MMRDA commissioner

Dr T Chandrasekhar and principal secretary (Urban development) Ramanand Tiwari. The

problem, MRVC officials say, is that both are very busy officers and do not get time to devote to

MRVC. Due to this most MRVC projects were stuck because of problems in land acquisition or

encroachments. While Chandrasekhar is in charge of rehabilitation, Tiwari’s department deals

with land acquisition8.

How a Land Acquisition Problem was tackled by Delhi Metro

After having land acquisition problems in acquiring three plots for construction, DMRC felt to

skip the Chhatarpur station. But the gap between the two stations on either side of Chhatarpur

would have been 2.7 km which is too long for a MRTS system. Then, DMRC decided to construct

the station using a special design costing an additional 30 to 50% expense to construct the

8 Source: http://right2information.wordpress.com/category/rti-success-stories/page/3/

http://right2information.wordpress.com/category/rti-success-stories/page/3/



How a Land Acquisition Problem was tackled by Delhi Metro

station within the time frame. The construction work of the station was delayed as the land for

the building of the station was acquired by DMRC in October 2009 after prolonged litigation. The

elevated station was constructed using a unique method using special pre-fabricated/structural

steel as the conventional construction technique by concrete would have taken at least 18 to 24

months. The steel structures were fabricated in a factory in Gurgaon in advance, brought to site

after land acquisition and got assembled.

7.13 Bangalore Master Plan: Land for Railway use

Vision of any city comes from its master plan. If master plan is made with due

care and vision, probably city development, particularly the transport problems

do not pose serious problems. Bangalore Development Authority is

contemplating to make City Master Plan for 2035. In fact, it has also called for

suggestions from public in this regard. South Western Railway should be

actively associated to identify future land requirements for Railway use. Land

requirement for all the above cited railway uses should be thoroughly studied

(by engaging a professional consultant if required) and analysed and land

should be clearly earmarked in the master plan for railway use. It is worth

noting that Hyderabad Metropolitan Development Authority (HMDA) earmarked

land for future Railway passenger terminal at Manoharabad and

Edulanagulapalli, freight terminal at Ravulapalli and passenger-cum-freight



terminal at Timmapur and Bhongir in the Hyderabad draft master plan published

in 20109.

Identifying land for railway use needs physical survey and series of

deliberations with various stake holders. In fact, it is a separate study by itself.

Therefore, specific locations (for earmarking the land for railway use) are not

suggested in this report.

9 source: http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2297287.ece

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article2297287.ece



8 Cost Estimates and Phasing of Investments

8.1 Overall CRS implementation Scheme in a Nutshell

Various activities required for implementing CRS in Bangalore discussed in

chapter 6 are put in a nutshell as under:

8.1.1 Structural Activities

Converting all CRS sections into double line, electrified and automatic

signalled.

Zero based redesign of SBC yard.

Developing 3rd coaching terminal at BYPLN.

Developing 4th Coaching terminal at Hejjala.

Procuring rolling stock (EMUs and MEMUs).

Developing EMU cum MEMU shed at BAND.

Bypass line at YNK (connecting DBU and CBP lines).

8.1.2 Allied Activities:

Raising and/or lengthening of platforms.

Other works en-route for introducing EMUs (checking and adjusting the

spacing of tracks, offsets to FOBs, ROBs, signal posts etc.).

Up gradation of facilities at existing stations (like waiting area, parking

area, ticketing area, bus stop etc.) to cater to increased commuters.

Development of new halt stations on CRS network.

8.2 Block Cost Estimates in a Nutshell

Block Cost estimates of various activities contemplated for implementation of

CRS are placed at Annexure-5. This total scheme is estimated to cost about Rs

8759 Crores. Considering the demand pattern, interdependence of various

activities and to facilitate easy investment decisions, this total scheme is

presented in 3 phases in subsequent paragraphs.



8.3 Summary of various activities needed

Various activities required to be undertaken for implementation of CRS for

Bangalore are already discussed in Chapter 6. All those activities are

summarised as under:

Doubling, electrification and automatic Signalling for all sections.

SBC yard remodelling: Increase in capacity of various sections (by way

of doubling, electrification and automatic signalling) can be utilised for

running additional services only when SBC yard redesign is implemented.

In the present form, SBC cannot handle the additional capacity generated

by up-gradations in various sections. After remodelling, SBC is likely to

have:

o About 15 platforms in place of present 10 platforms.

o An exclusive commuter handling area (PFs etc.) in Binny Mills

Land. This also includes an entry from the road near Binny Mills

Land for commuters.

o Entry to MYS side from almost all the lines of SBC yard.

o Universal reception and despatch facilities to maximum number

of lines.

o Full length shunting necks and stabling lines and pit lines (if any).

o Increased platform lengths.

o Solid State Interlocking.

o Improved passenger facilities like shelters, train information

boards, toilets, waiting area etc.

Entry to MYS side facilitates movement of more trains to Mysore side and

to terminate trains (which do not need any pit line attention) at different

stations of MYS section. This greatly relieves SBC and increases

commuter capacity of SBC.



After finalising the plan of SBC, detailed phase wise activities are to be

drawn. Typically, a few lines are dismantled at a time, new line (or

platform or so) which is supposed to come in that location is to be

constructed, they are to be linked to adjoining lines, electrical wiring and

signalling arrangements should also be done for those lines. Then few

more lines are taken up. Such activity may warrant regulation or

cancellation of trains. This complex activity involves detailed and

meticulous stage planning duly associating Civil Engineering, Electrical,

Signalling and Traffic branches of the Railway. All these activities may

run into a few months or even a year or even more. During such time,

travelling public is put to inconvenience to some degree or other.

With the kind of trains congestion and passengers‟ congestion at SBC

now, attempting to revamp the yard without offloading substantial

operating activity to alternate terminal is considered very risky. It is likely

to lead to chaos and invites avoidable public criticism.

Therefore, a very meticulous and well deliberated stage plan need to be

drawn by S W Railway to execute SBC yard remodelling.

YPR-TK, YPR-BYPL-HSRA and YNK-CKP sectors are technically not

dependent on SBC revamp. Additional trains in these sectors can ply

upto YPR. However, when SBC revamp is not done and additional

services from these sectors are not extended upto SBC, YPR may not be

able to handle additional commuters‟ congestion.

Due to morning and evening rush of unidirectional traffic and due to

meeting of lines from different directions at BYPL, and due to presence of

SGT and diesel sheds at WFD and KJM area, trains movement from SBC

to WFD is very critical. SBC – BYPL section is presently over saturated

and cannot handle even one additional train. Therefore, twin single line

arrangements from SBC to BNC and automatic signalling from BNC to

WFD are to be provided at the earliest so that SBC-BYPL section

capacity is enhanced.

Due to morning and evening rush of unidirectional traffic, commuter trains

may not get paths in YPR-SBC section. This needs additional capacity in



SBC-YPR. This block section is already provided with Twin Single Line

arrangements. This section may need to be further provided with IB

(Intermittent block) signals for both lines for both directions so that this

section capacity almost doubles.

Receipt of EMU/MEMUs should get synchronised with availability of its

maintenance facilities and readiness of the sections where these rakes

are to be run.

Platforms raising/lengthening and other works like checking tracks

spacing in yards en-route are to be done before EMUs start running.

Presently no facilities exist for EMU rakes maintenance in SBC area.

EMU services cannot be introduced unless EMU shed is developed. As

brought out in other chapters, EMU shed may need to be developed at

BAND. EMU cum MEMU shed can be planned for about 60 rakes.

However, actual facility needs to be developed for about 35 rakes of 16

cars each. Though initially 9 car EMU rakes are planned, facilities are

recommended to be developed for 16 car rakes because MEMUs are

going to be 16 cars right from the beginning. Cost difference of this

facility for 9 car rakes and 16 car rakes is also not substantial.

CRS is spread over 440.8 Km in 12 sections as already discussed in

other chapters. Electrification, doubling and automatic signalling is

normally done taking one section as one unit. To avoid duplication of

work, all the three (i.e. electrification, doubling and automatic signalling)

can be done simultaneously. Apart from this, up gradations of platforms,

procurement of MEMUs, EMUs etc. can also be done section wise so that

one section at a time can be implemented. Section wise Block Cost

estimates of various activities are placed at Annexure-5.

Rakes requirement calculations are done assuming on 15 car EMU rakes.

Though there is heavy demand for commuter services, patronage may

not pick up immediately as soon as service is started due to many

practical problems. Therefore, the EMU services proposed can be

started with 9 car EMU rakes initially and can be changed to 12 car rakes

and 15 car rakes in phases. This also helps in judicial phasing of



investments because EMU rakes procurement constitutes substantial

costs.

For EMU rakes, no steps exist for passengers to entrain/detrain. PF floor

level and EMU floor level are almost same. Therefore, platforms levels at

all existing halts should be checked up and raised wherever required. PF

lengths should not be a problem because already longer trains are

stopping at these halts. However, PF lengths should also be checked

and increased wherever required. Similarly, due to wider cars of EMUs,

spacing of tracks in CRS network especially in yards needs to be checked

up and adjusted as per need.

Facilities at terminals i.e. BWT, MYA, TK, HSRA, DBU, CBP, YPR and

YNK should be upgraded (like parking area, waiting area, platforms,

FOBs etc.).

8.4 Selection of Rakes and Impact on costs

As can be seen from the block cost estimates (Anneure-5), rakes (EMUs

and MEMUs) cost and EMU/MEMU shed costs together constitutes about

20 to 25% of total costs.

Some design features of rakes were already discussed Para 6.8.3.

Depending on design features of EMU, maintenance facilities required at

EMU shed also vary.

The block cost estimates are made considering the latest design EMUs

with 3 car EMU units. (Energy efficient 3 phase motors, stainless steel

body, GPS based passenger information system etc.)

However, in case GoK desires to bring down the costs, the issue can be

deliberated with MoR and ICF to finalise the features required.

Such cost cutting measures can save upto about 40% of cost (of rolling

stock plus cost of EMU shed). On total project cost of Rs. 8000 to 9000

crores, this savings may work out to upto about 10% to 12% depending

on the design finalised.

As EMUs/MEMUs are going to serve more than 35 years and as in

between no major technological up gradations are normally done to the



rakes (except routine maintenance), and as the cost difference is only

about 12%, it is recommended to adopt the latest EMU design available

on date with 3 car units. However, MEMUs are recommended with 4 car

units with conventional technology considering their nature (i.e. more like

long distance travel). The block cost estimates are also made

accordingly.

8.5 Phasing Philosophy

Apart from the above cited issues, phasing of investments and corresponding

benefits to the public are also important considerations while deciding the

phases. Client advised that they had deliberated among their officials and

desired to keep TK, CBP and HSRA sections under Phase 1 and balance in

phase 2. Accordingly, total proposed investment is recommended in 3 phases.

Phase 1: To tackle sections where the commuter demand is high i.e.

constituting about Two Thirds of total demand.

Phase 2: To tackle all balance sections.

Phase 3: To introduce additional halts on CRS network and to increase EMU

rake lengths from 9 car to 15 cars.

However, during the meeting organised by DULT on 11th July 2012, some

Railway officials present expressed that a small sub-set of activities out of total

scheme of CRS project can be completed immediately (in about 6 months to 1

year time) and a few additional services can be run to give some immediate

service to the public and rest of the CRS project can follow later. The Railway

officials present during the meeting were DRM, CTPM and other divisional

officers (along with GoK and RITES officials). Sub-set of activities suggested

were by the Railway officials were:

Procurement of 5 MEMU rakes.

Making SBC – BNC into twin single line and BNC – BYPL into automatic

signalling or IBs.



Development of 4 pit lines at BYPLN.

Development of 2 additional pit lines at YPR.

Accordingly, this sub-set of activities are shown as Phase 1A.

8.6 Phase 1A

As discussed in above paragraph, few activities of the total scheme for

immediate implementation are:

o Procurement of 5 MEMU rakes: Rs. 105 Cr

o Making SBC – BNC into twin single line system and

BNC-BYPL automatic signalling (or IB): Rs. 8 Cr

o Development of 4 pit lines at BYPLN: Rs. 40 Cr

o Development of 2 additional pit lines at YPR: Rs. 20 Cr

It is understood from S W Railway officials in the meeting of 11th Jul ‟12

that these measures create some additional paths on the system and a

few services can be run in those paths.

MEMU rakes can be run on electrified double line sections i.e. SBC-BWT

and SBC-MYA sectors. Additional services possible with these 5 rakes:

o Out of 5 rakes, 3 rakes can be operated in MYA sector and 2 in

BWT sector.

o Thus, 3 rakes can make 12 services (6 up and 6 down) in SBC-

MYA section and 2 rakes can make 12 services (6 up and 6 down)

in SBC-BWT sector. This is calculated taking 500 Km travel per

day for each rake and catering for 20% maintenance buffer.

o Thus, 24 services can be run with the proposed facilities which

give good relief to the commuting public.

As the feasibility of this scheme is already confirmed by local Railway

officials, GoK may need to pursue with MoR to approve this scheme.

MoR also is likely consider this favourably because this is a sub-set of

the full-fledged total CRS implementation scheme.



Additional MEMU rakes procured will be used in this phase to introduce

additional services in CRS network. Additional services are not

proposed to be run beyond the CRS network. These rakes will be used

in phase-2 to replace existing services as all new services will be run

with EMUs in phase-1 and 2.

Table: 8.1 Phase 1A in a Nutshell

Phase Investment (in Crores of

Rupees)

Potential $

(Services that can be additionally

introduced)

Additional Services

proposed to be introduced

#

Commuter trips that can be

generated per day at the end of Phase 1A in lakhs

1A 173 24 24 4 $ In addition to enhancing the capacity of existing services by replacing with

MEMUs and EMUs. Services in both directions together are indicated. # Each service proposed is assumed to originate and terminate in the same

section. For example, if a new service starts in SBC-YPR section and ends in YPR-TK section, it is counted as 2 services in this figure.

8.7 Phase 1

This phase is aimed at tackling the sections with maximum commuters

demand.

Sections with maximum demand as seen from “Demand Supply Analysis”

chapter are: YPR-BYPL-HSRA, YPR-TK and YPR-CBP.

After developing these sections, additional services can be run in these

sections upto YPR.

However, extension of trains from these sections to SBC needs SBC

revamp etc. Handling that much of commuters load may be difficult for

YPR and commuters are also not served as per their travel preferences

i.e. travelling to SBC. Therefore, SBC yard revamp is also included in

Phase 1.

This phase 1 in brief:

– Estimated Cost: Rs 3831 Crores.

– Time Frame: About 3 years from date of sanction by IR. However,

where doubling already exists (SBC-YPR-TK), CRS can be

implemented in 2 years.

– Potential for additional Services: 330 services.



– Additional Services proposed to be introduced considering the

demand: 172.

Estimated to cater for: 62% of estimated rail commuter demand in 2021.

Cost estimates of this phase-1 are summarised as under:

Table: 8.2 Block Cost estimates for Phase-1

S.

No

Act

ivit

y

Rat

e (i

n C

r)

Per

YPR-

BYPL

BYPL-

HSRA

SBC-

YPR

YPR-

TK

YPR-

YNK

YNK-

CBP Total

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

(Cr)

1 Doubling 12 Km 16.12 194 48.59 583 46.05 553 177 1330

2 Electrification&& 1.25 Km 32.24 40 97.18 121 10.70 13 128.00 160 92.10 115 471 449

3 Auto Signalling 0.75 Km 16.12 12 48.59 36 5.35 4 64.00 48 12.45 9 46.05 35 441 144

4 Extn/Rising PFs 3 Stn 2 6 4.00 12 1.00 3 10.00 30 2.00 6 6.00 18 53 75

5 Facilities at Terminals

15 Stn 1 15 1.00 15 1.00 15 1.00 15 1.00 15 9 75

6 Addl. lines at

Stns$ 10 Line 1 10 4.00 40 5.00 50 3.00 30 36 130

7 Facilities at

Exg. Stations^ 10 Stn 2 20 4.00 40 1.00 10 10.00 100 2.00 20 6.00 60 53 250

8

9 car EMUs (to

replace exg.

services)& 36 Rake 0.08 3 0.92 33 0.21 8 0.79 28 2 72

9 9 car EMUs (for

new services)* 36 Rake 2.5 90 7.51 270 0.23 8 2.77 100 0.64 23 2.36 85 24 576

Sections Cost Total -> 387 1117 41 536 81 939 3101

10 Development of EMU cum MEMU maintenance shed at Banaswadi → 200

11 SBC yard remodelling duly including Binny Mill Land → 370

12 Facilities at BYPLN (4 pit lines proposed in Phase 1A; Balance 6 pit lines, stabling lines PFs etc.) → 160

Total Cost of Terminals → 730

Total Cost of phase 1 (Sections Cost + Terminals Cost) → 3831 $ 2 additional lines at terminals and one additional line at alternate stations are recommended ^ Facilities like parking, waiting & ticketing area, bus stop etc. are required to cater for increased commuter traffic. & Existing services requiring replacement with EMUs can be seen at Annexure -4 * EMU rakes requirement at Annexure -6 assumes 15 car rakes. However, in this phase, 9 car rakes recommended. &&Where exg single line is electrified, one line cost is taken. Where exg Single line is non-electrified, both lines cost is

taken.



Table: 8.3 Services after Phase 1

YPR-

BYPL

BYPL-

HSRA

SBC-

YPR

YPR-

TK

YPR-

YNK

YNK-

CBP

Addl Services proposed (both the

directions together) @@ 28.00 80.00 16.00 18.00 4.00 26.00

Potential of the section (both the

directions together) ## 40.00 90.00 40 60 40.00 60

Share of City Demand expected to

serve $$ 3% 32% 1% 14% 1% 11%

@@ Additional Services are proposed based on demand (high scenario) for 2021. In case

patronage is more, services can be increased upto the potential of the section simply by procuring additional EMU rakes

## Potential is given in terms of services that can be introduced in both directions together in

commuter timings (Annexure-9) with the proposed up gradations duly making reasonable

provision for freight trains, long distance trains, maintenance operations etc.

$$ Share in overall commuter demand of the CRS area. This demand is expected to be met in this

phase.

Table: 8.4 Phase 1 in a Nutshell


Rupees)

Potential $ (Services that can

be additionally introduced)

Additional Services

proposed to be introduced #


generated per day at the end of Phase 1 in lakhs

1 3831 330 172 8 $ In addition to enhancing the capacity of existing services by replacing with

MEMUs and EMUs. Services in both directions together are indicated. # Each service proposed is assumed to originate and terminate in the same

section. For example, if a new service starts in SBC-YPR section and ends in YPR-TK section, it is counted as 2 services in this figure.

Figure: 8.1 CRS Implementation Phases



8.8 Phase 2

In this phase, it is recommended to take up all remaining sections for full-

fledged implementation of CRS in Bangalore.

This phase 2 in brief:

– Estimated Cost: Rs. 2251 Crores

– Time Frame: About 2 years from date of sanction by IR. However

where doubling already exists (SBC-BWT, SBC-MYA and YNK-

BYPL), CRS can be implemented in 2 years.

– Potential for additional services: 320 Services.

– Additional Services proposed to be introduced considering the

demand: 94.

– Estimated to cater for: 38% of estimated rail commuter demand in

2021.



Cost estimates of this phase are summarised as under:

Table: 8.5 Block cost estimates for Phase-2

S.

No

Act

ivit

y

Rat

e (i

n C

r)

Per

YNK-

BYPL

YNK-

DBU

SVDL-

Kunigal

SBC-

BYPL

BYPL-

BWT

SBC-

MYA Total

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

Qty

Am

ount

(Cr)

1

16 car MEMUs

(for replacing

exg. services)@ 21 Rake

2 Doubling 12 Km 20.72 249 45.20 542

66 791

3 Electrification&& 1.25 Km 20.72 26 90.40 113

111 139

4 Automatic

Signalling etc.# 0.75 Km 19.23 14 20.72 16 45.20 34

59.45 45 92.88 70 237 179

5 Extension/

Rising of PFs 3 Stn 1.00 3 1.00 3 3.00 9 3.00 9 8.00 24 12.00 36 28 84

6 Facilities at

Terminals 15 Stn

1.00 15 1.00 15

1.00 15 1.00 15 4 60

7 Addl. lines at Stations$

10 Line 1.00 10 3.00 30 4.00 40 2.00 20 6.00 60 7.00 70 23 230

8 Facilities at Exg.

Stations^ 10 Stn 1.00 10 1.00 10 3.00 30 3.00 30 8.00 80 12.00 120 28 280

9 9 car EMUs (for

new services)* 36 Rake 1.44 52 1.56 56 1.00 36 0.15 6 0.85 30 3.00 108 8 288

Sections Cost Total ->

89

405

819

65

254

419

2051

10 Developing Hejjala 4th Coaching Terminal→ 200


Total Cost of phase 2 (Sections Cost + Terminals Cost) → 2251 @ Services requiring replacement with MEMUs are at Annexure – 4. Costs included in phase 1A; Hence not shown. # SBC-BNC is recommended as twin single line. All other sections are recommended for Automatic Signalling. $ 2 additional lines at terminals and one additional line at alternate stations are recommended ^ Facilities like parking area, waiting/ ticketing area, bus stop etc. required to cater for increased commuter traffic. * EMU rakes requirement at Annexure-6 assumes 15 car rakes. However, in this phase, 9 car rakes recommended. @@ Addl Services are proposed based on demand (high scenario) for 2021. In case patronage is more, services can

be increased upto the potential of the section simply by procuring additional EMU rakes ##

Potential is given in terms of services that can be introduced in both directions together in commuter timings

(Annexure-9) with the proposed up gradations duly making reasonable provision for freight trains, long distance

trains, maintenance operations etc. $$ Share in overall commuter demand of the CRS area. This demand is expected to be met in this phase. &&If existing single line is electrified, cost is taken for one line only. If existing single is non-electrified, cost is taken

for both lines.



Rupees)



Additional Services


#

Commuter trips that can be generated per day at the end of

Phase 2 in lakhs

2 2251 320 94 15 $ In addition to enhancing the capacity of existing services by replacing with MEMUs and EMUs.

Services in both directions together are indicated. # Each service proposed is assumed to originate and terminate in the same section. For example, if a

new service starts in SBC-YPR section and ends in YPR-TK section, it is counted as 2 services in this figure.



8.9 Phase 3

This phase is aimed at:

Making use of the up graded infrastructure for serving more and more

public by introducing additional halts in the CRS network and by

increasing the length of EMU rakes and removing further finer

bottlenecks.

Thus, it is recommended to increase the length of EMU rakes to 12 rakes

and to 15 rakes keeping the same number of services and to develop

additional halts in CRS network.

Accordingly, phase – 3 is recommended as under:

Table: 8.7 Activities and Block cost estimates for Phase-3

No From To Distance

in Kms

New Halt Stations

(Rs 15 Cr per halt)

Increasing the length of

EMUs from 9 cars to 15

cars each

(Rs 24 Cr per rake)

Total Cost

in Rs of

Crores No of

Halts Cost in Cr

No of

Rakes Cost in Crores

1 YPR BYPL 16.12 9 135

10 240 510 BYPL HSRA 48.59 9 135

2 SBC YPR 5.35 1 15 4

96 276 YPR TK 64 11 165

3 YPR YNK 12.45 3 45 4

96 186 YNK CBP 46.05 3 45

4 YNK BYPL 19.23 7 105 3

72 222 YNK DBU 20.72 3 45

Figure: 8.2 CRS Implementation Phases



5 SDVL Kunigal 45.2 4 60 1 24 84

6 SBC BYPL 10.76 1 15

1 24 144 BYPL BWT 59.45 7 105

7 SBC MYA 92.88 14 210 3 72 282

Total 440.8 72 1080 26 624 1704

Bypass Line connecting DBU and CBP lines 300

Quadrupling between SBC and WFD 500

Total 2504



Rupees)

Potential $

(Services that can be additionally

introduced)

Additional Services



generated per day at the end of Phase

3 in lakhs 3 2504 NA & NA & 25

$ In addition to enhancing the capacity of existing services by replacing with MEMUs and EMUs.

Services in both directions together are indicated. &

It is recommended to increase length of EMU cars in this phase. However, this phase can also be converted into introduction of additional services instead of lengthening of existing EMU rakes as enough potential is available to introduce additional services as seen in above table.

Additional EMUs proposed in this phase are for increasing the length of EMU

rakes. However, these additional EMUs can also be used to run additional

services instead of lengthening existing rakes as CRS network will have

potential to run additional services with various up-gradations recommended.

8.10 Time frame for various phases

Apart from getting Binny Mill Land, EMUs/MEMUs procurement and

doubling are the most long lead items and critical items of the phases. All

other activities should be planned in such a way that their

completion/commissioning is synchronised with these critical activities.

ICF, BEML and 2 private players (Titagarh Wagons Ltd/Kolkata and

Jessop & Co Ltd/Kolkata) make EMUs in India.

Among all, ICF is the major player. Hyderabad MMTS and Mumbai

MRVC got their EMUs from ICF.

Through series of deliberations, MRVC and ICF improved so many

features of EMUs. EMU design adopted for phase I project is further

improved in their phase II project.

ICF is likely to deliver present MRVC orders by 2015.



If MRVC‟s latest design (stainless steel coaches with 3 Phase AC motors)

is straight away adopted, Bangalore CRS can save lot of time.

ICF has capacity of about 1500 coaches per annum which include all

varieties i.e. EMUs, MEMUs, sleeper class coaches, guard coaches, AC

coaches etc. Railway Board approves and conveys the annual

production program (i.e. quantity of each type of coach to be

manufactured within this 1500 coaches) to ICF.

Once Railway Board approves the program, ICF can start delivering

EMUs/MEMUs after about 8 to 12 months. Their supply rate shall be

normally about 3 rakes per month.

Therefore, from the date of formal understanding between GoK and

MOR, EMUs arrival to Bangalore is likely to take 1½ to 2 years.

Doubling activity of any section normally takes 3 years. Sections which

do not need doubling can be completed in 2 years.

All other activities proposed in various phases can comfortably be completed in

this 1½ to 2 years. Therefore, time frame for section for implementation of CRS

is 2 years if no doubling involved and 3 years if doubling is involved.

8.11 Scenario at the end of phase 3

After implementing phases 1A to 3 as brought out above, i.e. by about 2021,

CRS capacity will be more than 25 lakhs trips per day. (This capacity can be

substantially increased further by simply procuring additional rakes and

introducing additional services as all other infrastructure will be available). By

that time, total load on Bangalore public transport system shall be about 60 lakh

trips. Thus CRS shall cater for at least 40% of public transport needs of the city

which is a very healthy indication for any urban/suburban transport system. In

fact, this much of capacity shall be available even at the end of phase 2 but with

too much over crowding like in case of Mumbai (about 600 commuters per car!).

Extension of length of EMUs is recommended in phase 3 to ease out this

overcrowding. In fact, the EMUs procured in phase 3 can also be used for

running additional services instead of lengthening existing rakes as already

brought out.



8.12 Extension of CRS activity further

Once the above phases are completed, to increase the capacity of the system

further, it will be required to remove finer bottlenecks. Also it is required to

extend the CRS to new geographical areas. Some activities to take forward the

mission of CRS Bangalore are:

a. Increasing the frequency of CRS trains by procuring additional rakes

upto the potential shown in Annexure 9.

b. Development of 5th coaching terminal in TK side (within about 15 Km

from YPR).

c. Restoration of abandoned line in Baiyyappanahalli – Vimanpura area

and introducing commuter services.

d. Construction of 3 flyovers at BYPL area (connecting SBC-HSRA, BWT-

YNK, BWT-HEB) and 1 flyover at YPR (connecting HEB/YPR side to TK

side).

e. Constructing a line to facilitate direct entry of train from YNK to HEB

without touching YPR (bypass at LOGH).

f. Introducing longer EMUs (even beyond 15 cars) and fast (limited halts)

services.

g. Quadrupling of BYPL-HSRA, SBC, TK, SBC-MYS and other sections.

h. Elimination of all Level Crossings with ROBs/RUBs in CRS area.

i. Skywalk connecting Baiyyappanahalli North 3rd coaching terminal to

Baiyyappanahalli Metro Station.

j. Presently, SGT (Satellite goods terminal) near Whitefield is handling all

freight terminal activities. In the above phases, all the enhancements

are suggested without tinkering with freight operations. After these

phases, probably the freight terminals may need to be relocated to

enhance the CRS capacity further. Or additional freight terminals need

to be developed in different directions (MYS side, TK side and DBU



side) so that freight trains need not enter into whitefield area

unnecessarily and eating away commuter capacity.

k. Extension of rail services to new areas or extending CRS to some more

length on existing rail network i.e. beyond HSRA, TK, and MYA etc.

l. Development of Ring Rail around the city to cover greater public (One at

40 Km radius and another at 60-70 Km radius from SBC).

m. Construction of Air Link Rail.

8.13 Care need to be exercised by S W Railway

Planning capacity enhancement is a continuous activity on the Railway.

While planning so, care need to be taken to fit the activities into the

overall long term schemes of SBC, YPR, YNK and BYPLN etc.

Especially at SBC, activities like extension of existing pit lines etc. should

not be attempted as they will bring down capacity of SBC.

Land available at Hejjala (and other locations) should be strategically

earmarked for capacity building (developing 4th coaching terminal or so)

and not to be used for activities like building construction.

YPR-YNK doubling is in progress. During doubling, the block section is

better to be split into 2 block sections duly making LOGH as junction

station. Also, both block sections (YPR-LOGH and LOGH-YNK) can be

made as twin single lines.



9 Return on Investment

9.1 Extra Revenues to GoK due to implementation of CRS

Apart from direct revenues in the form of surcharge, there will be indirect

revenue to GoK due to increase in property values. To appreciate such

revenue, a broad idea is presented as under:

Out of the identified CRS network of 440.8 Km, about half the network is

in Bangalore Urban District / BBMP area.

Area where property prices are going to increase due to CRS

implementation is assumed as about 2.5 Km width ( i.e. about 1.25 Km

on either side of the track)

This works out to about 1100 SqKm i.e. about half the area of urban

district area.

Property Tax collection of BBMP for 11-12 (approx.): 1500 Cr

Income by way of Stamps and Registration charges in 11-12 10: 3500 Cr

Total: 5000 Cr

Against this, contribution of CRS influence zone (about half): 2500 Cr

If the property values shoot up by 50% in the first 1 or 2 years (this is

somewhat conservative estimate, actual shoot up may be even more),

increase in revenues to GoK due to implementation of CRS is about Rs

1250 Cr. This Rs 1250 Crores need to be enhanced by another 25% to

cover hikes of property values in rural districts of CRS network (as they

constitute balance 27% of the revenue).

That means, more than Rs 1500 Crores return to GoK in the first 1 or 2

years.

Even if it is assumed that property values become stagnant after 2 years,

this additional revenue of Rs 1500 Cr accrues to GoK every year

thereafter.

That means a return of about 1500 Crores per annum to GoK on an

investment of Rs 8000 to 9000 Crores. This is in addition to giving a 10

Income for the state of Karnataka is Rs 4800 Crores in 11-12 out of which 73 % is from Bangalore Urban Area – source : http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/karnataka/article3009869.ece)

http://www.thehindu.com/news/states/karnataka/article3009869.ece



good commuting service to Bangalore population and other economic

benefits like savings in journey time, less fuel consumption and less

environment pollution etc.

In addition to registration and property tax revenues, there will be other

revenues like advertisement revenue, trade licensing revenue etc. which

gets boosted due to implementation of CRS in CRS influence zone.

This little calculation is illustrated here just to emphasis the fact that

considering direct revenue alone (in the form of surcharge or so) is very

misleading while taking investment decisions.

9.2 Savings to GoK due to implementation of CRS

As already brought out in earlier chapters, various urban transportation

proposals (either sanctioned or under the process of sanction by GoK) are

parallel to CRS network within 1 Km as seen under:

Table: 9.1 Urban transportation proposals parallel to CRS

No From To Distance

(Km)


BRT Mono

Rail

High

Speed Rail

Link

Metro

Rail

Total

Overlap

(Km)

%

Overlap

1 SBC MYA 92.88 25.90

12.00 37.90 41%

2 SBC YPR 5.35

5.35 5.35 100%

3 YPR TK 64.00

0.00 0%

4 YPR YNK 12.45 3.64

3.00

6.64 53%

5 YNK BYPL 19.23

0.00 0%

6 YPR BYPL 16.12

7.39

5.40 12.79 79%

7 YNK DBU 20.72 20.31

20.31 98%

8 YNK CBP 46.05

4.30

4.30 9%

9 BYPL HSRA 48.59

6.68

6.68 14%

10 SBC BWT 70.21

6.33 6.33 9%


0.00 0%

Total → 440.8 49.85 14.07 7.3 29.08 100.30 23%

Investment decisions for creating all these modes of transportation facilities do

not appear to have considered the presence of rail network as one of the modes

of serving commuters. If these investment proposals are evaluated afresh duly

considering the presence of fully developed CRS network, probably, the

proposals still under pipe line may undergo a major change. Even a few Kms



reduction (due to fully developed CRS) in one or more of the above modes shall

bring great savings to GoK as the per Km costs are huge (Metro / High Speed

Rail Link to Airport: Rs 250 Cr/Km, Mono Rail : 175 Cr / Km).

Savings on account of such review can be like Rs. 10,000 crores as brought out

in discussion about cost of overlap (Para 2.9 and Table 2.9). Savings from

review of “High Speed Rail Link to Airport” proposal as brought out in Para 6.11

alone can fully finance this CRS implementation project of Rs. 8000 to 9000

crores.

9.3 Financial Rate of Return

Rate of return depends on the demand and pricing. For a commuter rail project,

especially for a system like Bangalore, demand is not an issue. Demand is

normally much more than the project can offer. But, the pricing is very tricky.

Any business model adopts scientific pricing model like demand-supply model

(price is fixed such that demand equals to supply) or cost plus profit model. As

is well known, Commuter train fares are not decided based on any of these

scientific methods. Fares are decided based on popular considerations without

concerning about the costs incurred to produce the service. Therefore, it is too

much of an optimism to think in terms of recovery of capital costs or even

running costs from a commuter project.

In this context, costs and returns scenario of Indian Railways is worth looking at.

Indian Railways accounting system is not in the form of a typical profit and loss

statement which normally any corporate entity maintains. It is in the form of

various indices and comparisons to previous years. Most of the assets (Track,

Signals, Locomotives, and Stations etc.) are used for all trains i.e. commuter

trains, long distance trains, freight trains etc. Therefore, it is practically not

possible to bifurcate various O & M costs into different categories. However,

certain parameters of Indian Railways are given below to give an idea of Indian

Railways financial returns.



Table: 9.2 Indian Railways earnings per vehicle Km

Segment Vehicle Km (in Millions)

Earnings (in Crores of

Rupees)

Earnings (Rupees per Vehicle Km)

Sub-Urban Passenger Service (EMUs only)

1438.50 1792.59 12.46

Other Passenger Service 18207.00 24000.04 13.18

Freight Service 17749.00 62844.72 35.41

All together 37394.50 88637.35 23.70

Source: Indian Railways Year Book 2010-11

Truly speaking, costs incurred by IR for one vehicle Km of freight and

passenger service are not same. As detailed data is not maintained by Indian

Railways, for the purpose of broad discussion, it is assumed that both are

same. From the above table, it can be seen that the earnings (per vehicle km)

from passenger service is much lower than freight earnings. Even in passenger

segment, earnings from sub-urban service are much lower than other

passenger earnings on vehicle Km basis.

Indian Railways operating Ratio is 94.59%11. That means, IR spends 94.59% of

its revenues for operations and maintenance (O&M) leaving about 5% operating

surplus. This is again a notional figure and does not truly reflect the real

operating ratio. Expenditure is normally limited to the budget allotment and

does not really reflect real requirement of expenditure. Therefore, it cannot be

taken for granted that operating ratio is less than 100%.

This operating ratio is for total services i.e. freight as well as passenger service.

As can be seen from above, passenger earnings per vehicle Km is far less than

freight earnings per vehicle Km. Thus, operating ratio of IR passenger service

(more so in case of commuter passenger service) shall be much more than

100%.

In the absence of detailed account available, O&M costs are broadly analysed

as under:

11

Source: Indian Railways Year Book 2010-11



Table: 9.3 Indian Railways O & M Profit/Loss

Earnings per vehicle Km (overall) Rs 23.70

Expenditure per vehicle Km (taking operating ratio as 94.59%) Rs 22.42

Earnings per Vehicle Km for EMU Rs 12.46

Operating Loss per Vehicle Km (EMU) Rs 9.96

Operating Loss of EMUs in percentage 44.4%

If interest on capital and depreciation of assets are also considered, the

financial rate of return is likely to be much less than above indicated (-)44.4%.

However, normally it is IR which bears operating costs and loss/profit and GoK

need not have much concern on this aspect.

9.4 Economic Rate of Return

Additional revenues due to appreciation of property values and savings to GoK

due to implementation of CRS discussed already should technically get

reflected in Economic Rate of Return. Even without considering those indirect

revenues and savings, economic rate of return in terms of capacity generated is

as under:

Table: 9.4 Economic rate of return in terms of capacity enhancement


Rupees)



Additional Services



generated per day (Cumulative

in Lacs)

0 0 0 56 @

2

1A 173 24 24 4

1 3831 330 172 # 8

2 2251 320 94 # 15

3 2504 NA & NA

& 25

$ In addition to enhancing the capacity of existing services by replacing with

MEMUs and EMUs. Services in both directions together are indicated. @

List of services existing as on now. Can be seen at Annexure 4 # Each service proposed is assumed to originate and terminate in the same

section. For example, if a new service starts in SBC-MYS section and ends in SBC-BYPL section, it is counted as 2 services in this figure.

& It is recommended to increase length of EMU cars in this phase. However, this phase can also be converted into introduction of additional services instead of lengthening of existing EMU rakes as enough potential is available to introduce additional services as seen in above table.



Each commuter trip contributes:

Savings in journey time because rail is going to capture the traffic which is

presently being served by bus or private transport etc.

Reduction in fuel consumption (trains are more fuel efficient than busses).

Reduction in pollution of atmosphere (Electrical trains emit no smoke into

atmosphere).

Extra comfort to commuters.

Increase in real estate prices near to CRS stations and correspondingly

more revenue to GoK by way of property sale/purchase registration

charges, property taxes etc. as brought out in Para 9.1.

Savings to GoK in overall infrastructure planning as brought out in Para

9.2.

Established modelling techniques can be used to quantify each of these

benefits in terms of rupees to work out economic rate of return. Such modelling

exercise is normally done when the financial appraisal of the proposal need to

be submitted to lending agencies.

9.5 Fare Structure & Surcharge

9.5.1 Fare Structure of Indian Railways

IR basic fare for commuter travel is levied in 2 categories:

o Sub-Urban (for Mumbai, Chennai, Calcutta and Delhi).

o Non sub-urban (for Rest of India including Hyderabad – MMTS)

IR Non sub-urban fare is less than Sub-urban fare for the same distance

and same class.

IR collects Re 1/- Development Charge (DC) uniformly from all

commuters in 2nd class in addition to basic fare. DC for 1st class is Rs

20/-.

MRVC fare = IR Sub-Urban Fare + DC + MRVC Surcharge.



CIDCO fare = MRVC fare + CIDCO surcharge.

Hyderabad MMTS fare = IR non sub-urban fare + DC + MMTS

Surcharge.

Overall CIDCO fare > Overall MRVC fare > Overall MMTS fare.

9.5.2 Surcharge being levied in commuter rail systems of India

Indian Railways or Government of Karnataka may like to impose some

surcharge on commuter tickets to recover part of the costs and to keep the CRS

expansion on. To enable the appropriate authority to decide on the level of

surcharge, surcharge being levied presently by other systems is brought out as

under:

Table: 9.5 Surcharge being levied in Mumbai

Distance

2nd Class

Ticket

2nd Class monthly

Ticket

1st Class

Ticket

1st Class Monthly

ticket Remarks

MRVC

Upto 10 Km 0 0 0 0 Surcharge levied

on 16th Sep ’03.

Not revised since

then

11 to 50 Km 1 10 2 20

51 to 100 Km 1 15 2 30

101 to 150 1 20 2 40

CIDCO

Not based on

distance but

for a

particular

origin to

destination

1 to 4 17 to 80 2 to 6 42 to 200

Surcharge initially

levied in 1990.

Revised once in

04-05.

Figures in Rupees Surcharge accrued from MRVC projects is somewhere around Rs.90 Cr in 11-12 with ridership of about 60 lacs. This

works out to about 41 paisa per commuter trip

Table: 9.6 Surcharge being levied in Hyderabad MMTS

Distance 2nd Class Ticket 2nd Class monthly

Ticket 1st Class Ticket

1st Class Monthly

ticket

Upto 25

Km 0

50% of basic fare

(rounded off to next

higher 5/-)

0 50% of basic fare


higher 5/-) Beyond

25 Km

10% of basic fare


higher 1/-)

10% of basic fare


higher 5/-)

In Hyderabad MMTS, basic fare charged is for “Non Sub-urban” category whereas in Mumbai and Chennai etc., basic fare charged is for “Sub-Urban” category.



9.5.3 Surcharge for Bangalore CRS

Surcharge can be imposed as certain percentage on IR basic fare (duly

rounding off to next higher rupee) rather than in terms of rupees so that

as and when basic fare is enhanced, surcharge gets enhanced.

It is considered viable to charge basic fare of “Sub-Urban” category (in

lines of Mumbai etc.) rather than “Non Sub-urban” category (like in case

of Hyderabad MMTS) so that revenue is more to IR and also surcharge

accrual will be more. However, it is IR who decides on category of basic

fare.

Considering the surcharges being levied on other systems of Indian

Railways, two scenarios are examined here.

Table: 9.7 Two Scenarios of level of surcharge for Bangalore CRS

Distance

Fare presently being

charged in Bangalore

With 50% surcharge on basic fare

(for 2nd class single ticket)

With 100% surcharge on basic

fare

(for 2nd class single ticket)

Basic Fare

(Non

Suburban)

DC Total

Fare

Basic Fare

(Suburban) DC Surcharge

Total

Fare

Basic Fare

(Suburban) DC Surcharge

Total

Fare

1 1 1 2 3 1 2 6 3 1 3 7

5 1 1 2 3 1 2 6 3 1 3 7

10 1 1 2 3 1 2 6 3 1 3 7

15 1 1 2 4 1 2 7 4 1 4 9

20 2 1 3 5 1 3 9 5 1 5 11

25 3 1 4 6 1 3 10 6 1 6 13

50 7 1 8 10 1 5 16 10 1 10 21

Surcharge accrues per annum

(taking 18 lac commuters by 2021

and average sub-urban revenue of

Rs 4.40 per commuter trip as per

IR year book 10-11)

Rs 130 Crores Rs 260 Crores

18 lac commuters is considered on week days. On weekends, travel will be less. Therefore, a small correction factor is applied while working out Surcharge accrual.

Fares of 10-11 are considered for working out Surcharge accrued. Fares may get revised in future. Surcharge accrued will also go up as and when fares get revised

GoK‟s Share of surcharge (50% or 100% or so) depends on the agreement/MOU with GOI

From the above, it can be seen that fares with 100% surcharge are

comparable to BMTC fares.



Level of surcharge is mostly a socio-political decision rather than a simple

financial decision. Probably surcharge can be levied somewhere between 50%

and 100% on basic fare so that commuters are not burdened too much and also

reasonable amount can be recovered for the investments made.



10 Institutional Arrangements & Financing

10.1 Financing by Indian Railways – The Traditional Model

All Railway projects (new or enhancement to existing assets) are traditionally

financed by Indian Railways themselves. Through this traditional model of

financing, growth of IR network since independence is:

Table: 10.1 Growth of Indian Railway Network

Year Route Km in India Track Km in India@

1950# 53596 77609

2010$ 64460 113994

Average Annual Growth Rate 0.31% 0.64% #Source: Indian Railways Year Book 2002-03 $Source: Indian Railways Year Book 2010-11

@ Includes all track like double line track, station lines, sidings etc.

Route KMs indicate expansion of railway network to new geographical areas,

Track KMs indicate the enhancement of facility like converting a single line into

double line, making extra platform lines in a station etc.

From the above, we can reasonably assume that commuter rail system in

Bangalore shall continue to grow at a rate of 0.64% per annum under this

financing model which is nowhere nearer to the growth of demand (or growth of

population). Hence this model of financing is not suggested. In fact, if this

model of financing is to be adopted, probably this study by RITES is not

warranted at all.

10.2 Hyderabad – MMTS model

Feasibility study was got done by GoAP to develop mass rapid transport plan

for Hyderabad. This feasibility study and further follow up by Government of

Andhra Pradesh (GoAP) led to signing of MOU between MOR and GoAP on

25th Sep „2000. Based on the report prepared by GoAP, Railways put up a

feasibility report to CCEA (Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs) in Jul‟01.

The MOU was basically to develop commuter rail services on existing rail

network in HYB/SC-Lingampalli (28.1 KM) and SC-Falaknuma (14.54 KM)



sections. As per the MOU, Cost has to be shared at 50%-50% with a provision

for levy of at least 25% surcharge to be retained by IR. The costs were

estimated as 69.96 Cr for infrastructure and 84 Cr for 20 MEMU rakes. Work

was sanctioned by MOR in Oct ‟01 and work completed in Feb ‟04 at a cost of

98.75 Cr for up gradation and Rs 60.88 Cr for Rolling Stock. Patronage of

MMTS phase-I is:

Table: 10.2 Patronage of Hyderabad MMTS

Description Originating passengers per day @

Initially projected during project appraisal 336000

03-04 13104

04-05 25486

05-06 35770

11-12 Over 150000# @ Source : http://www.cag.gov.in/html/reports/railways/2007_6_peraud/chap_4.pdf

# Source: http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/article2981025.ece

Govt. of Andhra Pradesh mooted the proposals for Phase-II even when Phase-I

was under execution. However, Railways decided (in 2006) that Phase-II would

not be taken up until phase-I becomes financially viable. Finally Phase-II was

sanctioned by Railways in 2012 with financing by GoAP (66.67%) and MOR

(33.33%). MOR also proposed to set up a SPV for commercial management of

MMTS leaving the O&M to IR for rapid growth of MMTS and to meet public

aspirations12. While the South Central Railway started making all planning for

execution, the SPV is yet to take shape. The scope of the project under MMTS

phase-II is:

Table: 10.3 Projects under MMTS Phase II

Section Activity Length (KM)

Estimate (Cr)

Falaknuma – Umdanagar Doubling 20 85

New Line to Shamshabad Airport New Line

Telapur – Patancheru Restoration of abandoned Line 9 32

Secunderabad – Bolaram Electrification & Stations Remodelling 14 30

Sanatnagar – Maulali doubling Doubling 22 170

Moula-Ali – Malkajgiri- Seethapalmandi Doubling and Electrification 10 25

Bolaram – Medchal Doubling and Electrification 28 74

12

Source: 12-13 budget speech of Hon’ble MR

http://www.cag.gov.in/html/reports/railways/2007_6_peraud/chap_4.pdf

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/article2981025.ece



Section Activity Length (KM)

Estimate (Cr)

Moula-Ali – Ghatkesar Quadrupling 12 120

Passenger Amenities Platforms, Station Buildings etc. 20

EMU Rakes Rakes 85

Total 115 641

Expected Capacity : 3 Lakh trips per day

Source : http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/article2981025.ece, http://www.exclventures.com/News/Newslink-11324.asp and

http://www.thehansindia.info/News/Article.asp/category=1&subCategory=2&ContentId=42711

From MMTS-Hyderabad model, it is worth noting:

In 2000-01 period, the then ruling party of AP was the most key ally of

the then ruling party at the centre. Therefore, the project (Phase-I) got

sanctioned and got executed expeditiously.

Phase-I was basically making use of the potential available in certain

sections of the existing IR network by minimal changes. The project

includes provision of Automatic Signalling, electrification of missing

patches, construction of platforms, station buildings etc., procurement of

EMU rakes and developing maintenance facilities for EMUs. No

significant inputs were given to track. Bangalore has got no such spare

capacity available in the existing network, therefore capacity

enhancement need to be planned.

As per MOU, state government shall provide land free of cost wherever

required for development of stations and concerned facilities like roads

etc.

In phase-II, the major thrust is to enhance the capacity of already

saturated sections by doublings, construction of new lines etc. as could

be seen in above table. Therefore, this phase-II takes more time for

execution. Coupled with the financial crunch being faced by IR and

GoAP and political uncertainty prevailing in the states and the centre,

phase-II may take more time than expected.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Hyderabad/article2981025.ece

http://www.exclventures.com/News/Newslink-11324.asp

http://www.thehansindia.info/News/Article.asp/category=1&subCategory=2&ContentId=42711



Sanction of phase-II took almost 9 years. AP mooted proposals in 2003

itself. But the project was sanctioned only in 2012 as the proposal goes

through lengthy process of sanction which includes reference to Planning

Commission also.

In the first year of sanction i.e. 2012-13, Railway allotted about Rs 100 Cr

budget for the phase-II project whereas Government of AP has not

allotted any funds so far. In fact, first year of sanction normally goes for

planning, survey, tendering etc. and not much budget grant will be spent.

Success of this project depends on how Railway and GoAP allot the

funds in subsequent years.

Today, the finance crunch being faced by Railway is probably the worst

ever. Therefore, GOI agreeing for cost sharing of Bangalore CRS

(whether 33% or 25% or so) is anybody‟s guess.

IR has to incur operating losses as commuter service is a loss making

business (more details in “Return on Investments” chapter). IR should

also plan additional resources specially the manpower recruitment and

training to run additional services. With virtual ban prevalent in IR for

addition of manpower, IR weighs many factors to sanction the commuter

rail project for Bangalore, even if GoK comes forward to bear 100%

costs.

Except some review meetings especially at political level, there is

practically no monitoring mechanism to decide the priorities of various

activities and to ensure expeditious completion of the projects.

While the system (phase-I) was expected to cater for more than 3 lacs

passengers per day, patronage even today is about 1.6 lacs per day.

This is mostly due to non-development of feeder roads to MMTS

stations. There is no institutional mechanism to plan and monitor the

development of feeder roads. The patronage has been increasing not

because some additional facilities were created to the public (like feeder



roads etc.). It is simply due to its low cost. Even without proper feeder

roads, public is taking all pains to make use of this cheaper service.

GoAP has virtually no say in the services being run. IR decides on their

own the number of services, their direction, timings etc. IR is under no

obligation to run certain number of services etc.

Surcharge if at all levied, accrues to IR and not to GoAP as per the MOU

(phase-I). Levy of surcharge (or otherwise) shall be mostly decided by IR

themselves and GoAP does not have any say.

Debt financing, exploitation of commercial space etc. do not form a part

of the scheme.

Once the identified projects are completed (like phase-I), to execute

further enhancement projects (like phase-II) the whole process need to

be virtually started afresh. There is no arrangement to undertake

continues expansion/increase of network/infrastructure (or even

services).

10.3 Mumbai – CIDCO Model

CIDCO (City and Industrial Development Corporation of Maharashtra

Ltd) was formed in Mar „1970 to plan and create environment-friendly,

model urban settlements with full-fledged physical and social

infrastructure to meet residential, commercial and industrial needs of

population.

In Nov „1986, MOU was entered by CIDCO with IR for provision of rail

connectivity to Navi Mumbai.

Cost of the construction of railway line, station buildings, commercial

area etc. was shared between CIDCO (67%) and IR (33%).

Rolling Stock was provided by IR.

Ownership of the land and line remains with IR.



O & M is IR‟s responsibility. O & M costs are borne by IR. Operational

losses are also borne by IR. However, non-operational maintenance

costs are to be borne by CIDCO.

IR levied surcharge of Re 1/- per ticket on 2nd class & Rs 2/- on first

class ticket and the same was transferred to CIDCO. In 04-05, the

surcharge was raised to Rs 2/- to 6/- per ticket depending on the class

and distance.

CIDCO had the rights to commercialize the air space and other parts of

the station area.

Under this model, The Mankhurd to Belapur new line (27 Km) was

commissioned in 1993.

As a next phase, CIDCO and IR agreed in 1996 to construct Belapur –

Seawoods – Uran line at a cost of Rs 494 Crores. However, this project

is pending before High Court on environmental grounds.

In essence, CIDCO model and Hyderabad MMTS model are more or

less same except the share of the respective parties, provisions about

commercial exploitation and bearing non-operational maintenance costs.

10.4 Mumbai - MRVC Model

MRVC came into existence in Jul ‟99 with equity of Rs 25 Cr (GOI: GOM = 51%:

49%). The corporation gets the identified projects executed and also plans

development of Mumbai Suburban Rail System on a continuous basis. The

mandate of the entity is:

Integrate suburban rail capacity enhancement plans with urban

development plan for Mumbai and propose investments.

Implement rail infra projects in Mumbai.

Commercially develop Railway land and airspace in Mumbai to raise

funds for suburban railway development.



Rehabilitation and Resettlement of project affected households.

Where direct involvement of running trains and signals is involved, works are

executed by IR. Works like station buildings, circulating areas etc. which need

not involve disturbance to train operations are executed by MRVC directly.

Procurement of EMU rakes is also done by MRVC. Feeder roads etc. are

executed by GoM. Phase-I costs about Rs 4200 Cr. The funding mechanism:

Budgetary Support from GoM and IR.

Borrowings to be decided by mutual consent of GoM and IR on project to

project basis.

Surcharge to be levied on commuters from a date to be mutually agreed

by GoM and IR

Revenue from commercial development of railway land and air space.

Phase-I is expected to increase the number of train services by 25% and

vehicle KMs by 33%. Phase-I is almost completed now. MRVC planned for

further enhancing the capacity of sub-urban trains of Mumbai and rolled out

plans for phase-II and III.

Works taken up in Phase-II are:

Optimisation of existing network (Western Railway, Central Railway and

Harbour Lines).

Procurement of EMUs.

Developing maintenance facilities and stabling lines for EMUs.

AC to DC conversion of certain sections.

Quadrupling and 5th & 6th lines in certain sections.

Rehabilitation of affected households.

MRVC receives certain fee (called “Directional and General Charges”)

from GOI and GOM for its services.



10.5 Recommendations and Suggestions

1. Rail system undisputedly needs to be an integral part of any urban

commuter system like Bangalore.

2. Therefore, it needs continues implementation (not one project

implementation) mechanism for up gradations and enhancements to

keep in pace with ever growing transport needs of the public.

3. Therefore, an arrangement like MRVC is ideal to roll out plans

continuously to integrate rail system with commuter system.

4. Process of bringing BCRC (Bangalore Commuter Rail Corporation)

into existence involves:

a. Identifying and freezing the list of projects that should form initial

mandate of BCRC.

b. Doing techno-economic survey of these projects. This stage

involves preliminary field survey and making preliminary technical

specifications of the project and making preliminary estimate.

c. Drafting the constitution and structure of SPV, its scope, role of

different constituents of SPV, equity share holding etc.

d. Making out a formal proposal to GOI.

e. Holding series of meetings with GOI until the SPV becomes

reality.

5. The above process is a long drawn process. Making a formal

proposal itself may take a year or so. Therefore, a very optimistic

assessment of the time frame to realize the SPV is about 2 years.

Thereafter, execution of the identified projects takes few more years.

6. Therefore, to derive early service to the public and expedite the

entire process, an interim measure as under is suggested.

a. Identify certain projects which can be taken up immediately and

which can give immediate benefit to the public. These projects

should be a subset of the whole scheme.

b. These projects should be 100% financed by GoK or through its

entities.

c. Make out a formal proposal accordingly to GOI.



d. GOI should not have any reservations on accepting this proposal

in principle. However, GOI may refer the proposal to South

Western Railway for their comments and remarks. GOI may at

the most workout O&M implications because IR only should bear

the O&M costs and operating losses. Also, they have to plan for

additional manpower recruitment and training. Considering the

public cause involved and considering the just marginal increase

in operating losses on all India basis, agreeing for the proposal in

principle by IR is not considered a major issue.

e. Proposal of GOK should also have :

Provisions for some assured number of commuter services.

Services to be proposed at the end of each phase are

given in Demand Supply Assessment Chapter.

Time frame for commissioning the projects.

Features desired for EMUs like good interiors, GPS based

information system etc.

Level of surcharge to be levied.

Levy of surcharge for about 30 years and review of

surcharge by GoK and transferring it to GoK (or its entity).

Development of additional halt stations at maximum

possible locations.

Deciding basic fare in “Sub-urban category” (like in case of

Mumbai) rather than “Non suburban category” like in case

of Hyderabad MMTS.

These issues shall form a part of discussion and

negotiations with GOI.

If GoK approaches GOI with a simple proposal without details like preliminary

survey report, preliminary estimates etc., GOI refers the projects to S W

Railway for survey. This phase itself takes lot of time. To cut short such time, it

is recommended to carry out preliminary survey and draft SPV before

approaching GOI. However, while undertaking preliminary survey, S W Railway



should be taken into confidence and Ministry of Railways also should be kept

formally informed.

10.6 Special Purpose Vehicle

10.6.1 SPV Model

As brought out earlier, constituting a SPV is essential to effectively integrate rail

network into Bangalore commuting system and effectively address the

commuting challenges. The BCRC (Bangalore Commuter Rail Corporation)

can be in the lines of any one of the 2 models:

Pure Business entity Model: This model is like KRCL (Konkan Railway

Corporation Ltd). The SPV shall be totally responsible for generating

necessary revenue for its operations and also for debt servicing apart

from executing the projects. Even with long distance express trains

earnings, KRCL ran into losses in the initial years of its inception due to

debt servicing burden. Then equity was enhanced to bring down the

debt burden on KRCL to manageable levels.

Consultancy Service Model: This model is like MRVC. In this model,

the SPV only formulates the plans and rolls out projects in consultation

with its shareholders GoI and GoM. It co-ordinates the preparation of

project reports, financial appraisals for submission to lending agencies

etc. Lending agencies (like World Bank or so) disburses the loan

amounts to GOI and GoM directly in equal proportion (as GOI and GoM

are more or less equal shareholders in MRVC). GOI executes tracks,

signals etc., GoM executes feeder roads etc. on their own. GOI and

GoM transfer certain funds to MRVC to execute works like Car Sheds,

circulating areas and other works not connected with tracks etc. MRVC

executes those activities. For formulating plans, processing loans,

executing certain activities etc., MRVC charges a fee (in terms of certain

percentage on the project‟s cost) from the shareholders i.e. GoI and

GoM. This consultancy fee (MRVC call it “Direction and General

Charges”) is the source of revenue for MRVC. IR collects the surcharge



and transfers half of the surcharge to GoM. World Bank loan is directly

repaid by GoI and GoM.

With the surcharge income or with the very less commuter fares, the SPV

cannot sustain to function in KRCL model. Therefore, it is recommended that

BCRC be formulated in the same lines of MRVC.

10.6.2 Debt and Equity

As in case of MRVC model, equity is required only for day to day functioning of

the BCRC and not for projects. Therefore, equity can be about 100 Crores

(MRVC‟s equity is 50 Crores). Equity share holders will be basically

Government of India and Government of Karnataka. It can be 50% - 50%

equity share holding or 51% (GOI): 49% (GOK) like in the case of MRVC. In

case GoI does not come forward, it is worth even to hike GoK‟s equity upto

100% considering the importance of CRS for Bangalore.

Equity can be provided either directly by the government or through their

entities like IDD or K-RIDE or so.

Normally no infrastructure project can take off purely with equity. Some debt

component may be a must for the success of any project. However, BCRC per

se does not have any debt component as it only offers some services as

discussed above. Debt component is jointly decided by shareholders (GoI and

GoM) separately for each project. Accordingly, justification is made and lending

agencies are approached.

Private Equity can be attracted only in case of viable projects. Commuter rail

business per se does not attract private equity due to its less revenue.

Therefore, some options that need to be explored to attract private equity by the

SPV:

Provide alternate income sources like real estate exploitation etc. (apart

from commuter fares) to investors.

Provide VGF (Viability Gap Funding) by GOI and GoK.



Design and evolve standalone projects with different fare structure

(different from IR fare structure) so that private equities can flow into

these projects.

Accordingly, BCRC can also formulate certain projects involving private equity.

10.6.3 Viability Gap Funding

As requested by client, feasibility and relevance of VGF for CRS project

is discussed hereunder.

Viability Gap funding is normally giving one time grant by Government to

a private investor to finance, design, construct and operate a facility

during the concession period.

Private investors come forward and invest in expectation of the return in

the form of revenue during the concession period.

In the present case of upgrading existing rail network into a full-fledged

CRS, design, construction, and operation is done by IR and no other

agency can do that.

Therefore, private investor can only finance the project leaving design,

construction and operation to IR.

Fares are decided by IR (on socio political consideration) and private

investors can not have any say that. At the most, the private investor

can get surcharge in return.

Even with the expectation of surcharge in return, private investor comes

forward provided there is commitment on quantum surcharge and

suitable clauses to revise surcharge from time to time during concession

period. With the present experience of Railway projects in India, such

commitments to a private investor especially in commuter rail projects is

far from feasible.



Real estate exploitation provisions also attract investors. In the present

case of CRS implementation, all the assets along CRS network belong to

IR and entrusting its rights to private investors may not be acceptable to

IR as their assets serve freight traffic and long distance passengers apart

from commuters.

Assuming a surcharge of Rs 100 Crores per annum and 2% per annum

increase in the quantum of surcharge, present value of this surcharge

works out to about Rs 1070 Crores (assuming concession period of 33

years and Rate of return as 12%). If the project is costing more than

8000 Crores, then the viability gap works out to more than 7000 Crores.

Assumed return of 12% may not attract any private investors because

their cost of capital itself will be around 10%.

Therefore, it is considered not a worthy option to go for VGF way to

finance the present CRS project.

To effectively make use of the VGF facility, exclusive stand-alone

projects should be designed where separate fare structure can be

designed with commitments of future revisions.

Therefore, it is recommended to explore this facility for future projects

(extending the CRS to new geographical areas) after the CRS is

implemented on the already existing rail network.

Present CRS implementation may need to be financed purely by GoK

either with its own funds or by loans from World Bank or so.

10.6.4 Stake Holders

Chairman: Normally Railway Board Member (as in case of MRVC).

MD: Jointly decided by the shareholders (GoI and GoK).

Officials normally need to be on the Board of the SPV:



Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department.

Principal Secretary, (Infra)/GoK

Commissioner, DULT

Other officials from Government of Karnataka (through IDD or UDD).

General Manager / South Western Railway.

Divisional Railway Manager / Bangalore Division / South Western

Railway.

Nominee of Bangalore Metro Transport Corporation.

Nominee of Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation.

Apart from Chairman, MD and above cited independent directors, BCRC shall

also have full time functional as under:

Director (Planning & Projects): To continuously interact with various

stake holders and roll out new projects and get them approved by

shareholders. Also, to execute the works directly or get them executed

by S W Railway or by some state agency as the case may be. He is

responsible for Railway projects as well as feeder road projects,

ROB/RUBs etc. so that CRS stations get well connected by Road.

Director (Technical): To co-ordinate execution of electrical activities like

procurement of EMUs, construction of EMU sheds and

modifications/alterations to electrical installations.

Director (Finance).

10.6.5 Projects Identification and Sanction

Projects discussed under different phases of this report form initial

mandate of the SPV.



Projects identification is a continuous process. Processing each phase

of the project is very long lead item. Its lead can be as big as execution.

If phase-I takes 2 years for completion, by the time phase-I is completed,

proposals should be ready along with financial closure for phase-II.

The projects shall be proposed keeping in view the total transport plan of

the city. Projects proposed by BCRC shall be formally approved by

shareholders (IR and GoK). This will also help IR to plan the necessary

arrangements for O & M of such projects (for manpower recruitment,

training etc.).

10.6.6 Execution of the Projects and O&M

BCRC shall be Chief Project Manager i.e. it is project implementing

agency responsible and accountable for satisfactory completion of its

projects. It is responsible for co-ordinating financing arrangements and

get the loans sanctioned to its shareholders (GoI and GoM).

BCRC shall divide each project into logical and meaningful packages.

Packages which directly affect running trains, track and signalling

systems shall be executed by South Western Railway. Feeder road

projects are normally executed by state government agencies.

Packages which can be executed free of running trains/track etc. can be

executed by BCRC itself. To this extent, BCRC can have suitable

engineering team to execute the projects.

Specially works like road connectivity for CRS stations should be

planned and executed by BCRC itself.

All assets created shall be handed over to Indian Railways for O & M. O

& M costs and O & M profits / losses shall be borne by IR.

10.6.7 Fare Structure and Sharing of Revenues

Working out O&M costs by IR is easier said than done. IR‟s accounting

system does not facilitate bifurcation of O&M costs into various heads



like freight, commuter rail, long distance trains etc. Moreover, IR takes

entire South Western Railway as one unit (not even Bangalore Division)

while working out O&M costs. Then working out O&M costs for

commuter rail that too only for Bangalore area alone is very complex with

IR‟s accounting system. Therefore, any model to share O&M costs (or

profits/loss) may not be practicable. Instead, simple surcharge model

which is easy to implement is suggested.

As already discussed in other chapters, commuter service is a loss

making business. Therefore, attempting to share the revenues and O&M

costs is not favourable to GoK or BCRC.

Fare structures and surcharge modalities are already discussed in

previous chapter.

10.6.8 Land, Air Space and Non Fare Revenues

Available Railway land shall be used for commuter rail projects and the

same shall continue to be Indian Railways‟ property. Also, land

belonging to GoK if required for the projects shall also be handed over to

Railways duly charging its cost to the projects or free of cost as decided

from project to project.

Private Land if required for commuter rail projects shall be acquired by

IR. However, BCRC shall facilitate such land acquisition.

Vacant Railway land and vacant GoK‟s lands and even vacant air space

along the commuter lines shall be processed by BCRC for commercial

exploitation.

BCRC can take such properties on nominal lease rentals from GoI and

GoK and exploit them. Alternatively, it can charge certain fee from the

shareholders for co-ordinating the process and the revenues accrue to

GoI or GoK as the case may be.



In the similar way, advertisements revenue from existing stations, new

stations and EMU rakes can be managed.

GoK may also consider enhancing the property taxes, property values,

and other indirect charges from the properties around the CRS stations

to tap the increased commercial value of those areas due to

implementation of CRS.



11 Recommendations and Roadmap further

11.1 Summing up

A commuter should be able to travel a distance of about 70 Km (or even 100

Km) in about an hour so that areas like Hosur, Tumkur, Mandya, Bangarapet

etc. get developed fast and pressure on main hub Bangalore shall be eased.

Namma Metro, Mono Rail, High Speed Rail to BIAL, rejuvenated BMTC

services etc. cannot really provide this type of solution. They only provide some

relief in a limited extent to very highly urbanised Bangalore area. Commuter rail

has got all wherewithals to effectively provide solution to this problem.

Any commuter transport plan (rather any transport plan) shall be incomplete, if it

does not integrate rail system into it apart from other modes.

In case of roadways, KSRTC‟s mandate is for long distance bus services. It

cannot cater for commuter traffic. Another entity BMTC exists for this purpose.

Similar way, IR cannot be expected to take care of the commuter rail services.

Its mandate is long distance travel and not urban transport.

Therefore, to tap the full potential of Railway network and to effectively integrate

rail network into commuter system of Bangalore, Government of Karnataka has

to take the lead (rather, an extra lead).

CRS development is not a onetime activity. It is a continuous process. For

metro rail, there is an entity BMRCL. For roads, there is BMTC. Similarly, for

commuter rail, an exclusive entity BCRCL (Bangalore Commuter Rail

Corporation Ltd) should come into existence. Then only CRS will get upgraded

continuously in tune with demand.

11.2 Launching Physical Surveys

As an immediate step, it is recommended that GoK to launch physical surveys

for:



a) Detailed measurement of Binny Mills land and identifying optimum

piece of it to hand over to Railways. As this is a most sensitive issue,

various plans are to be made with different scenarios with detailed site

measurements. All these scenarios should be discussed with S W

Railway and all other stake holders to decide on the extent of land that

can be made available to CRS. Such survey should also include

commercial exploitation aspects as brought out in Para 7.4.2.

b) Deciding Locations and Making plans for new halt stations. Aspects

like land availability, road connectivity, feasibility in rail system to provide

new halt, patronage potential etc. need to be analysed thoroughly for

locating new halt stations. This needs physical survey of the entire 440.8

Km of CRS network apart from interactions with S W Railway and all

other stake holders.

c) Identifying the stations where additional line and additional

platform can be constructed for CRS trains. Station layout, signals

locations, bridge locations at the stations, land availability at the stations

etc. should be favourable for additional line. All stations cannot have

such favourable conditions. As already discussed in the report, an

additional line exclusively for CRS trains at every station or at least

alternate station is required to implement CRS. Physical survey is

required to critically analyse the existing stations and to identify specific

stations for additional lines and for making conceptual plans.

d) Developing conceptual plans for terminal stations (BWT, HSRA,

DBU, CBP, TK, MYA, YNK, YPR and Kunigal) clearly earmarking parking

area, passengers waiting area, ticketing area, foot over bridges, land

available with Railways, land to be acquired and location of bus stop etc.

If these are not planned initially, a fully developed CRS network also may

end up with less patronage. Hyderabad MMTS is a live example in this

aspect.



e) Developing conceptual plans in the above lines for SBC and all other

stations of the CRS network.

f) Detailed survey for airport rail link as discussed in Para 6.11.

g) Once Railway sanctions the projects (on commitment of finances from

GoK or otherwise), Railway does all the surveys and planning required to

run the EMUs (again to say “only to run EMUs”). IR makes plans for

MEMU/EMU sheds, automatic signalling arrangements,

raising/lengthening of platforms, adjusting spacing of tracks to run EMUs

etc. etc. It means to say that Railway does planning for every activity

provided: Without that activity, it is not possible to run EMUs. Other

activities [like the ones referred at (a) to (f) above] are not essential to

run EMUs by IR. Therefore, IR has simply no mechanism to put its soul

in these activities and IR has no expertise to make proper plans for these

activities which are not directly connected with Railway operations. It is

GoK which has to take immediate action to make plans for these

activities which are not directly connected with train operation but have

lot of bearing on serving commuters. Otherwise, infrastructure only will

get developed to run EMUs like in case of Hyderabad without necessary

peripherals.

h) As already brought out, if GoK approaches GOI with a simple proposal

without details like preliminary survey report, preliminary estimates etc.,

GOI refers the projects to S W Railway for preliminary physical survey.

Based on the physical survey report and based on the commitment of

finances from GoK, Railways sanction the projects. This phase itself

takes lot of time. To cut short such time, it is recommended to carry out

preliminary survey of the projects which GoK intends to finance 100%.

However, while undertaking preliminary survey, S W Railway should be

taken into confidence and Ministry of Railways also should be kept

formally informed. Once projects are sanctioned by IR, it does all

detailed physical surveys (required to run EMUs) and also executes the

works for implementing the CRS as brought out in above paragraph.



i) RITES has got expertise and all wherewithal to undertake the above

cited physical surveys.

11.3 Proposal to GoI

An SPV coming into existence and start delivering services to the public is a

long drawn process. Therefore, it is recommended that:

Finance phase 1 activities fully i.e. 100%.

Make out a proposal to Ministry of Railways duly bringing out the total

scope of the projects (covering all the 3 phases suggested) and its

readiness to finance 100%.

The proposal can also contain a request to form BCRC in the lines of

MRVC to implement phases 2 and 3 and take the mission further.

The proposal need to be self-contained along with abstract estimates,

techno economic survey reports etc.

GoK can also clearly indicate that:

– Certain number of additional services to be run on CRS network.

(as assessed already in Para 5.8)

– Additional halts are to be constructed to serve commuters.

– Fare to be charged is to be: “Sub-urban” category at par with

Mumbai rather than “Non Sub-urban Category” as in case of

Hyderabad MMTS to get maximum surcharge revenue.

– Surcharge to be levied on basic fare (50% to 100% rounding off to

next higher rupee) and to be transferred to GoK.

– Surcharge to be reviewed from time to time.

Against this investment, GoK should not expect any further returns like

share of revenues, say in fare policy, say in day to day O & M, ownership



of newly created assets etc. Ownership of the newly created assets

(though 100% financed by GoK) shall remain with Indian Railways.

This model is suggested just to get immediate consideration of the proposal by

Ministry of Railways and get immediate relief to Bangalore commuter woes.

Moreover, the investments required for CRS implementation (even all 3 phases

put together) are virtually insignificant compared to the GoK‟s investments in

Metro Rail, Mono Rail, High Speed Rail to BAIL, BMTC etc. But the benefits

are just immense as brought out in Chapter 9.

Once such a proposal goes to MoR, it is likely to sanction the projects (100%

financed by GoK) within 3 to 6 months‟ time. BCRC also may come into

existence in about 2 years‟ time.

Implementation of Commuter Rail System for Bangalore Final Report (July 2012)


Annexure: 1 Lie-Over at SBC yard

No Rake Arrival Rake Departure Lie-

Over

Maintenance

Type

Engine needs

Reversal? Train Origin Direction Time Train Destination Direction Time

1 12683 ERS BYPL 4:20 12684 ERS BYPL 17:15 12:55 N/A Yes

2 22607 ERS BYPL 4:20 22608 ERS BYPL 17:15 12:55 N/A Yes

3 12785 KCG BYPL 6:25 12786 KCG BYPL 18:20 11:55 N/A Yes

4 12678 ERS BYPL 19:50 12677 SBC BYPL 6:15 10:25 N/A Yes

5 16322 TVC BYPL 8:35 16321 TVC BYPL 18:50 10:15 N/A Yes

6 16316 KCVL BYPL 8:35 16315 KCVL BYPL 17:15 8:40 N/A Yes

7 16215 MYS MYS 9:40 16216 MYS MYS 18:15 8:35 N/A Yes

8 56242 YPR YPR 10:45 56227 ASK YPR 16:45 6:00 N/A Yes

9 56228 ASK YPR 11:20 56230 MYS MYS 16:25 5:05 N/A No

10 56229 MYS MYS 12:10 56241 YPR YPR 16:05 3:55 N/A No

11 56263 MYS MYS 4:00 56510 MKM BYPL 7:00 3:00 N/A No

12 12613 MYS MYS 13:30 16201 SMET YPR 16:30 3:00 N/A No

13 16557 MYS MYS 19:40 16592 UBL BYPL 22:00 2:20 N/A No

14 16591 UBL BYPL 6:10 16558 MYS MYS 8:15 2:05 N/A No

15 18463 BBS BYPL 12:05 18464 BBS BYPL 14:00 1:55 N/A Yes

16 56914 UBL YPR 20:40 56911 UBL YPR 22:15 1:35 N/A Yes

17 16519 JTJ BYPL 8:00 56262 AJJ BYPL 9:20 1:20 N/A Yes

18 56912 UBL YPR 5:15 56913 UBL YPR 6:30 1:15 N/A Yes

19 12639 MAS BYPL 13:20 12640 MAS BYPL 14:30 1:10 N/A Yes

20 16202 SMET YPR 11:55 12725 DWR YPR 13:00 1:05 N/A Yes

21 56237 MYS MYS 18:00 56238 MYS MYS 19:00 1:00 N/A Yes

22 12726 DWR YPR 14:05 12614 MYS MYS 15:00 0:55 N/A No

23 56261 MAS BYPL 18:45 16522 MKM BYPL 19:35 0:50 N/A Yes

24 16228 SMET YPR 4:30 56233 MYS MYS 5:15 0:45 N/A No

25 17210 CCT BYPL 12:35 17209 CCT BYPL 13:20 0:45 N/A Yes

26 56234 MYS MYS 22:30 16227 SMET YPR 23:15 0:45 N/A No

27 16222 MAS BYPL 4:10 16222 MYS MYS 4:50 0:40 N/A No

28 56226 TK YPR 17:40 56223 ASK YPR 18:20 0:40 N/A Yes




Over

Maintenance

Type

Engine needs


29 56222 TK YPR 13:10 56225 TK YPR 13:40 0:30 N/A Yes

30 12692 SSPN BYPL 22:30 1692 MAS BYPL 23:00 0:30 N/A Yes

31 22818 MYS MYS 3:00 22818 HWH BYPL 3:30 0:30 N/A No

32 16209 AII YPR 4:00 16209 MYS MYS 4:30 0:30 N/A No

33 12648 NZM BYPL 1:00 12648 CBE BYPL 1:30 0:30 N/A Yes

34 16521 BWT BYPL 23:25 56264 MYS MYS 23:55 0:30 N/A No

35 56509 MKM BYPL 17:00 16520 JTJ BYPL 17:30 0:30 N/A Yes

36 11013 LTT BYPL 21:50 11013 CBE BYPL 22:15 0:25 N/A Yes

37 16731 TN BYPL 6:40 16731 MYS MYS 7:00 0:20 N/A No

38 22817 HWH BYPL 1:40 22817 MYS MYS 2:00 0:20 N/A No

39 56214 TPTY BYPL 7:10 56214 CMNR MYS 7:30 0:20 N/A No

40 56224 ASK YPR 9:10 56232 MYS MYS 9:30 0:20 N/A No

41 11014 CBE BYPL 15:05 11014 LTT BYPL 15:25 0:20 N/A Yes

42 16232 MYS MYS 18:45 16232 NV BYPL 19:05 0:20 N/A No

43 16210 MYS MYS 21:40 16210 AII YPR 21:55 0:15 N/A No

44 16221 MYS MYS 23:30 16221 MAS BYPL 23:45 0:15 N/A No


46 12691 MAS BYPL 5:25 12691 SSPN BYPL 5:40 0:15 N/A Yes

47 12647 CBE BYPL 23:00 12647 NZM BYPL 23:15 0:15 N/A Yes

48 56213 CMNR MYS 20:15 56213 TPTY BYPL 20:30 0:15 N/A No

49 12975 MYS MYS 12:55 12975 JP BYPL 13:05 0:10 N/A No

50 12976 JP BYPL 12:55 12976 MYS MYS 13:05 0:10 N/A No



53 56231 MYS MYS 9:10 56221 TK YPR 9:20 0:10 N/A No

54 16231 MV BYPL 5:50 16231 MYS MYS 6:00 0:10 N/A No



57 16732 MYS MYS 21:10 16732 TN BYPL 21:20 0:10 N/A No




Over

Maintenance

Type

Engine needs


58 16518 CAN MYS 7:05 16518 YPR YPR 7:10 0:05 N/A No


60 12430 NZM BYPL 6:40 12429 NDLS YPR 20:20 13:40 Secondary Yes

61 12577 DBGA BYPL 20:50 12578 DBGA BYPL 10:10 13:40 Secondary Yes

62 12591 GKP BYPL 4:50 12592 GKP BYPL 16:50 12:00 Secondary Yes

63 12510 GHY BYPL 11:50 12509 GHY BYPL 23:30 11:40 Secondary Yes

64 16505 GIM/JU YPR 4:00 16537 NCJ BYPL 23:05 19:05 Primary Yes

65 16507 GIM/JU YPR 4:00 16506 GIM YPR 21:55 17:55 Primary Yes

66 16507 YPR YPR 4:00 16508 JU YPR 21:55 17:55 Primary Yes

67 16593 NED YPR 6:10 16594 NED YPR 23:00 16:50 Primary Yes

68 16525 CAPE BYPL 6:55 16526 CAPE BYPL 21:40 14:45 Primary Yes

69 12657 MAS BYPL 5:10 12627 NDLS BYPL 19:20 14:10 Primary Yes

70 12494 NZM BYPL 6:40 12493 NZM YPR 20:20 13:40 Primary Yes

71 16590 KOP YPR 7:35 16589 KOP YPR 21:15 13:40 Primary Yes

72 16501 YPR YPR 4:50 16532 AII YPR 17:20 12:30 Primary Yes

73 12296 PNBE BYPL 20:40 12295 PNBE BYPL 9:00 12:20 Primary Yes

74 56513 NCR BYPL 19:00 56514 NCR BYPL 7:15 12:15 Primary Yes

75 12609 MAS BYPL 20:05 12610 MAS BYPL 8:00 11:55 Primary Yes

76 56516 CTA YPR 20:00 56515 CTA YPR 7:50 11:50 Primary Yes

77 16529 CSTM BYPL 8:50 16530 CSTM BYPL 20:10 11:20 Primary Yes

78 16538 NCJ BYPL 4:00 16502 ADI YPR 13:30 9:30 Primary Yes


80 56524 HUP YPR 9:25 56523 HUP YPR 18:40 9:15 Primary Yes

81 12628 NDLS BYPL 13:40 12658 MAS BYPL 22:45 9:05 Primary Yes

82 56507 MKM BYPL 9:15 56508 MKM BYPL 18:05 8:50 Primary Yes


84 12080 UBL YPR 21:25 12079 UBL YPR 6:00 8:35 Primary Yes

85 56526 CBP YPR 9:45 56525 CBP YPR 18:00 8:15 Primary Yes




Over

Maintenance

Type

Engine needs


86 76512 MKM BYPL 10:30 76511 MKM BYPL 12:20 1:50

Primary (Only

on Sunday, Non

Running Day)

No

(DEMU/MEMU)

87 56910 HDT YPR 5:15 56913 SBC YPR 6:30 1:15

Primary (Only

on Sunday, Non

Running Day)

No

(DEMU/MEMU)

88 56918 SMET YPR 21:10 56909 UBL YPR 22:15 1:05

Primary (Only

on Sunday, Non

Running Day)

No

(DEMU/MEMU)

89 66531 BWT BYPL 14:25 66532 BWT BYPL 14:55 0:30

Primary (Only

on Sunday, Non

Running Day)

No

(DEMU/MEMU)

90 76552 CBP BYPL 18:00 76553 DPJ BYPL 18:30 0:30

Primary (Only

on Sunday, Non Running Day)

No (DEMU/MEMU)

91 76554 DPJ BYPL 8:10 76551 CBP BYPL 8:40 0:30

Primary (Only

on Sunday, Non

Running Day)

No

(DEMU/MEMU)

92 66529 BWT BYPL 9:30 66530 BWT BYPL 9:50 0:20 Primary (Only

on Sunday, Non

Running Day)

No

(DEMU/MEMU)



Annexure: 2 Criss-Cross movements that can be made seamless by Flyovers

No Train No. Origin Destination Time at BYPL

Direction of Train

Flyover No

1 12648 NZM CBE 00:20:00 YNK-SBC 4

2 12648 NZM CBD 01:42:00 SBC-HSRA 1

3 12778 KCVL UBL 03:50:00 BWT-HEB 3

4 12835 THE YPR 04:00:00 BWT-HEB 3

5 12889 TATA YPR 04:10:00 BWT-HEB 3

6 12292 MAS YPR 05:03:00 BWT-HEB 3

7 16591 UBL SBC 05:46:00 YNK-SBC 4

8 12785 KCG SBC 05:56:00 YNK-SBC 4

9 12863 HWH YPR 06:18:00 BWT-HEB 3

10 12677 SBC ERS 06:37:00 SBC-HSRA 1

11 16614 CBE RJT 07:32:00 BWT-YNK 2

12 56514 SBC SA 07:44:00 SBC-HSRA 1

13 12254 BGP YPR 07:53:00 BWT-HEB 3

14 16529 CSTM SBC 08:16:00 YNK-SBC 4

15 12845 BBS YPR 09:37:00 BWT-HEB 3

16 15228 MFP YPR 10:19:00 BWT-HEB 3

17 15902 DBGR YPR 10:27:00 BWT-HEB 3

18 18642 BBS SBC 11:23:00 YNK-SBC 4

19 12976 JP MYS 12:23:00 YNK-SBC 4

20 12628 NDLS SBC 12:56:00 YNK-SBC 4

21 12245 HWH YPR 15:28:00 BWT-HEB 3

22 12540 LKO YPR 15:44:00 BWT-HEB 3

23 22601 MAS SNSI 16:04:00 BWT-YNK 2

24 76552 CBP SBC 17:34:00 YNK-SBC 4

25 76553 SBC DPJ 18:55:00 SBC-HSRA 1

26 16232 SBC MV 19:33:00 SBC-HSRA 1

27 22618 TYTY YPR 20:08:00 BWT-HEB 3

28 12544 TYTY YPR 20:21:00 BWT-HEB 3

29 17311 MAS VSG 20:40:00 BWT-HEB 3

30 11013 LTT CBE 21:16:00 YNK-SBC 4

31 12692 SSPN MAS 21:44:00 YNK-SBC 4

32 16332 TVC CSTM 21:45:00 BWT-YNK 2

33 16732 MYS TN 21:48:00 SBC-HSRA 1

34 11013 LTT CBD 22:40:00 SBC-HSRA 1



Annexure: 3 Additional Halts suggested by voluntary organisations

Additional Halts suggested by voluntary organisations

S.No Sector Inter

Distance S.No Sector

Inter

Distance

1 Yesvantpur-

Baiyyappanahalli Venkatagiri kote 3.00

Yeshvantpur 0.00 Nandi Hills 6.50

Gokula Extension 4.10 Chikballapur south (SJCIT) 2.80

Lottegollahalli 1.40 Chikballapur 3.60

RMV Extn (D Rajagopal Rd) 1.60 4 Baiyyappanahalli- Yelahanka

Hebbal 1.30 Benniganahalli 0.00

Guddadahalli 1.10 Channasandra 2.20

Kanakanagar 1.30 Horamavu (near main rd) 1.80

Nagavara Main rd 1.40 Hennur 1.80

Kadugondhalli 1.10 Bagalur rd cross 1.80

Banaswadi 1.30 Thanisandra 2.10

Kamanahalli Rd (IOC

Flyover) 1.00 Jakkur East 3.00

Kasturinagar (near SAIL) 1.50 Nehru Nagar (NH-7 Jn) 2.00

Benniganahalli 1.20 Yelahanka Jn 1.40

Baiyyappanahalli 5 Yelahanka – Dodballapur

2 Baiyyappanahalli - Hosur Yelahanka Jn 0.00

Benniganahalli 0.00 Kenchanhalli West 2.20

Kaggadasapura (near Railway

Cross) 2.10 Naganahalli 1.60

Karthik Nagar (east of ORR) 2.60 Rajankunte 5.00

Varthur Rd (Marathalli

bridge) 1.80

Dodballapur Ind Area

(middle) 8.30

Belandur Rd 2.50 Dodballapur 3.20

Karmelaram 3.30 6 Yesvantpur – Tumkur

Sarjapur Rd (just past level

crossing) 1.10 Yeshvantpur 0.00

Heelalige 10.90 HMT 3.20

Anekal road 10.50 Jalahalli West (Near Jalahalli

Main Rd) 1.80

Hosur 13.40 Chikbanavar 2.90

3 Yelahanka– Chikballapur Soldevanahalli 2.90

Yelahanka Jn 0.00 Gollahalli 9.90

Kenchanhalli East 2.20 Bhairanayakanhalli 6.60

MVIT /Ganganahalli 4.10 Dodbele 4.40

Betthalsoor 2.10 Muddalingahalli 6.90

Dodjala 4.30 Nidvanda 4.40

NH-7 /BIAL trumpet

Interchange 3.70 Dobbspet 1.00

Devenahalli 7.10 Hirehalli 8.50



Additional Halts suggested by voluntary organisations

S.No Sector Inter

Distance S.No Sector

Inter

Distance

Avatihalli 6.80 Kyatsandra 6.10

Vijaynagar (Siddaganga) 2.80 Malleswaram 2.70

Tumkur 2.60 Bangalore City 2.70

7 Yesvantpur - Yelahanka 10 Bangalore City - Mandya

Yeshvantpur 0.00 Bangalore city 0.00

Gokula Extension 4.10 Binnypet (Bus stand) 2.30

Lottegollahalli 1.40 Chord Road 2.20

Kodigehalli 1.60 Nayandahalli 2.90

Jakkur West (Allalasandra

main rd) 1.60 Jnana Bharati (BU) 1.40

Yelahanka south (NH7 /Level

crossing) 1.70 Rajarajeshwari nagar (RVCE) 2.30

Yelahanka Jn 2.00 Kengeri 1.20

8 Baiyyappanahalli -

Bangarapet NICE Rd (Southwest) 1.80

Benniganahalli 0.00 Kumbalgodu (Rajarajeswari

Dentl /Engg) 4.10

KR Puram 1.60 Hampapura (WonderLa) 3.20

Hoodi (Main rd cross) 4.70 Hejjala 1.90

Sadarmangal (Kodigehalli rd

cross) 2.00 Bidadi 6.40

Whitefield 2.60 Ketohalli 8.30

Devangonthi 7.80 Ramanagaram 6.50

Malur 12.20 Channapatna 6.90

Byatrayanahalli 8.80 Settihalli H 6.12

Tyakal 6.00 Nidaghatta H 5.23

Maralahalli 5.80 Maddur 9.06

Bangarapet Jn 6.20 Hanakere 10.11

9 Yesvantpur – Bangalore City Mandya 7.78

Yeshvantpur 0.00

Subramanyanagar (Milk

colony) 1.70



Annexure: 4 Trains presently serving Bangalore commuters and enhancing their capacities

Service Service Within CRS Strategy

Existing Capacity

Capacity Enhanced to Rakes

Requirement

No

Tra

in

Exis

ting T

ype

Fro

m

To

Dis

tance

Fro

m S

tati

on

Dep

artu

re

To S

tati

on

Arr

ival

Dis

tance

Tra

vel

led i

n C

RS

Rep

lace

wit

h 1

6 c

ar M

EM

U

Rep

lace

wit

h E

MU

Lea

ve

as it

is

Exis

ting F

orm

atio

n

Exis

ting C

om

mute

r T

rips

Cap

acit

y

Tri

ps

gen

erat

ed b

y 1

6 c

ar M

EM

Us

Tri

ps

gen

erat

ed b

y E

MU

s

(wit

h 9

Car

Rak

es)

Tri

ps

that

gen

erat

ed b

y e

xte

nsi

on o

f

9 C

ar E

MU

rak

es t

o 1

5 c

ar r

akes

Exis

ting C

om

mute

r T

rips

unaf

fect

ed

Tota

l

ME

MU

Rak

e K

m

EM

U R

ake

Km

1 56229 Pass MYS SBC 137 MYA 09:21 SBC 12:10 92.88 Y 9 3710 8793 0 0 0 8793 137 0

2 56230 Pass SBC MYS 137 SBC 16:25 MYA 18:16 92.88 Y 9 3710 8793 0 0 0 8793 137 0







9 56507 Pass MKM SBC 86 BWT 07:05 SBC 09:15 70.21 Y 15 4674 6647 0 0 0 6647 86 0

10 56508 Pass SBC MKM 86 SBC 18:05 BWT 19:58 70.21 Y 15 4674 6647 0 0 0 6647 86 0

11 56509 Pass MKM SBC 86 BWT 14:40 SBC 17:00 70.21 Y 10 3116 6647 0 0 0 6647 86 0

12 56510 Pass SBC MKM 86 SBC 07:00 BWT 08:58 70.21 Y 10 3116 6647 0 0 0 6647 86 0

13 66529 MEMU KPN SBC 104 BWT 07:30 SBC 09:30 70.21 Y 8 3324 6647 0 0 0 6647 104 0

14 66532 MEMU SBC MKM 86 SBC 14:55 BWT 16:39 70.21 Y 8 3324 6647 0 0 0 6647 86 0

15 66533 MEMU MKM KJM 72 BWT 18:00 KJM 19:10 56 Y 8 2651 5302 0 0 0 5302 72 0




Existing Capacity


Requirement

No

Tra

in

Exis

ting T

ype

Fro

m

To

Dis

tance

Fro

m S

tati

on

Dep

artu

re

To S

tati

on

Arr

ival

Dis

tance

Tra

vel

led i

n C

RS

Rep

lace

wit

h 1

6 c

ar M

EM

U

Rep

lace

wit

h E

MU

Lea

ve

as it

is

Exis

ting F

orm

atio

n

Exis

ting C

om

mute

r T

rips

Cap

acit

y

Tri

ps

gen

erat

ed b

y 1

6 c

ar M

EM

Us

Tri

ps

gen

erat

ed b

y E

MU

s

(wit

h 9

Car

Rak

es)

Tri

ps

that

gen

erat

ed b

y e

xte

nsi

on o

f

9 C

ar E

MU

rak

es t

o 1

5 c

ar r

akes

Exis

ting C

om

mute

r T

rips

unaf

fect

ed

Tota

l

ME

MU

Rak

e K

m

EM

U R

ake

Km

16 66534 MEMU KJM KPN 90 KJM 19:30 BWT 20:40 56 Y 8 2651 5302 0 0 0 5302 90 0

17 76511 DEMU SBC MKM 86 SBC 12:20 BWT 14:30 70.21 Y 9 3739 6647 0 0 0 6647 86 0

18 76512 DEMU MKM SBC 86 BWT 08:37 SBC 10:30 70.21 Y 9 3739 6647 0 0 0 6647 86 0

19 56221 Pass SBC TK 70 SBC 09:20 TK 11:05 69.35 Y 8 2462 0 4432 2955 0 7387 0 70

20 56222 Pass TK SBC 70 TK 11:20 SBC 13:10 69.35 Y 8 2462 0 4432 2955 0 7387 0 70

21 56225 Pass SBC TK 70 SBC 13:40 TK 15:25 69.35 Y 8 2462 0 4432 2955 0 7387 0 70

22 56226 Pass TK SBC 70 TK 15:50 SBC 17:40 69.35 Y 8 2462 0 4432 2955 0 7387 0 70

23 56525 Pass SBC CBP 64 SBC 18:00 CBP 19:50 63.85 Y 7 1984 0 4080 2720 0 6800 0 64

24 56526 Pass CBP SBC 64 CBP 07:55 SBC 09:45 63.85 Y 7 1984 0 4080 2720 0 6800 0 64

25 66530 MEMU SBC BWT 70.21 SBC 09:45 BWT 12:05 70.21 Y 8 3324 0 4487 2991 0 7478 0 70.21

26 66531 MEMU BWT SBC 70.21 SBC 14:55 BWT 16:25 70.21 Y 8 3324 0 4487 2991 0 7478 0 70.21

27 76507 DEMU BNC BWT 66 BNC 11:00 BWT 12:50 66 Y 8 3124 0 4218 2812 0 7030 0 66

28 76508 DEMU BWT BNC 66 BWT 15:30 BNC 17:20 66 Y 8 3124 0 4218 2812 0 7030 0 66

29 76551 DEMU SBC CBP 73 SBC 08:40 CBP 10:50 77.28 Y 8 3658 0 4939 3293 0 8232 0 73

30 76552 DEMU CBP SBC 73 CBP 15:55 SBC 18:00 77.28 Y 8 3658 0 4939 3293 0 8232 0 73

31 56213 Pass CMNR TPTY 532 MYA 17:55 BWT 22:00 163.09 Y 15 10857 0 0 0 10857 10857 0 0




Existing Capacity


Requirement

No

Tra

in

Exis

ting T

ype

Fro

m

To

Dis

tance

Fro

m S

tati

on

Dep

artu

re

To S

tati

on

Arr

ival

Dis

tance

Tra

vel

led i

n C

RS

Rep

lace

wit

h 1

6 c

ar M

EM

U

Rep

lace

wit

h E

MU

Lea

ve

as it

is

Exis

ting F

orm

atio

n

Exis

ting C

om

mute

r T

rips

Cap

acit

y

Tri

ps

gen

erat

ed b

y 1

6 c

ar M

EM

Us

Tri

ps

gen

erat

ed b

y E

MU

s

(wit

h 9

Car

Rak

es)

Tri

ps

that

gen

erat

ed b

y e

xte

nsi

on o

f

9 C

ar E

MU

rak

es t

o 1

5 c

ar r

akes

Exis

ting C

om

mute

r T

rips

unaf

fect

ed

Tota

l

ME

MU

Rak

e K

m

EM

U R

ake

Km

32 56214 Pass TPTY CMNR 532 BWT 05:15 MYA 09:15 163.09 Y 15 10857 0 0 0 10857 10857 0 0

33 56223 Pass SBC ASK 166 SBC 18:20 TK 19:50 69.35 Y 8 2462 0 0 0 2462 2462 0 0

34 56224 Pass ASK SBC 166 TK 07:20 SBC 09:10 69.35 Y 8 2462 0 0 0 2462 2462 0 0

35 56227 Pass SBC SMET 274 SBC 16:45 TK 18:20 69.35 Y 9 2770 0 0 0 2770 2770 0 0

36 56228 Pass SMET SBC 274 TK 09:15 SBC 11:20 69.35 Y 9 2770 0 0 0 2770 2770 0 0

37 56241 Pass SA YPR 225 HSRA 08:30 YPR 10:45 67 Y 9 2676 0 0 0 2676 2676 0 0

38 56242 Pass YPR SA 225 YPR 16:05 HSRA 17:31 67 Y 9 2676 0 0 0 2676 2676 0 0

39 56261 Pass AJJ SBC 289 BWT 16:40 SBC 18:45 70.21 Y 10 3116 0 0 0 3116 3116 0 0

40 56262 Pass SBC AJJ 289 SBC 09:20 BWT 11:00 70.21 Y 10 3116 0 0 0 3116 3116 0 0

41 56503 Pass YPR BZA 741 YPR 08:00 DBU 09:00 33.17 Y 11 1619 0 0 0 1619 1619 0 0

42 56504 Pass BZA YPR 741 DBU 14:55 YPR 17:10 33.17 Y 11 1619 0 0 0 1619 1619 0 0

43 56513 Pass NCR SBC 557 HSRA 16:50 SBC 19:00 60.59 Y 14 3764 0 0 0 3764 3764 0 0

44 56514 Pass SBC NCR 557 SBC 07:15 HSRA 08:32 60.59 Y 14 3764 0 0 0 3764 3764 0 0

45 56515 Pass SBC UBL 470 SBC 07:50 TK 09:28 69.35 Y 16 4924 0 0 0 4924 4924 0 0

46 56516 Pass UBL SBC 470 TK 17:22 SBC 20:20 69.35 Y 16 4924 0 0 0 4924 4924 0 0

47 56523 Pass SBC HUP 101 SBC 18:40 DBU 19:33 38.52 Y 13 2222 0 0 0 2222 2222 0 0




Existing Capacity


Requirement

No

Tra

in

Exis

ting T

ype

Fro

m

To

Dis

tance

Fro

m S

tati

on

Dep

artu

re

To S

tati

on

Arr

ival

Dis

tance

Tra

vel

led i

n C

RS

Rep

lace

wit

h 1

6 c

ar M

EM

U

Rep

lace

wit

h E

MU

Lea

ve

as it

is

Exis

ting F

orm

atio

n

Exis

ting C

om

mute

r T

rips

Cap

acit

y

Tri

ps

gen

erat

ed b

y 1

6 c

ar M

EM

Us

Tri

ps

gen

erat

ed b

y E

MU

s

(wit

h 9

Car

Rak

es)

Tri

ps

that

gen

erat

ed b

y e

xte

nsi

on o

f

9 C

ar E

MU

rak

es t

o 1

5 c

ar r

akes

Exis

ting C

om

mute

r T

rips

unaf

fect

ed

Tota

l

ME

MU

Rak

e K

m

EM

U R

ake

Km

48 56524 Pass HUP SBC 101 DBU 07:53 SBC 09:25 38.52 Y 13 2222 0 0 0 2222 2222 0 0

49 56913 Pass SBC UBL 470 SBC 06:30 TK 07:58 69.35 Y 12 3693 0 0 0 3693 3693 0 0

50 56914 Pass UBL SBC 470 TK 21:05 SBC 22:45 69.35 Y 12 3693 0 0 0 3693 3693 0 0

51 56917 Pass SBC SMET 274 SBC 06:30 TK 08:00 69.35 Y 21 6463 0 0 0 6463 6463 0 0

52 56918 Pass SMET SBC 274 TK 19:22 SBC 21:30 69.35 Y 21 6463 0 0 0 6463 6463 0 0

53 76505 DEMU BNC KQZ 83 BNC 17:55 BWT 19:30 66 Y 8 3124 0 0 0 3124 3124 0 0

54 76506 DEMU KQZ BNC 83 BWT 08:00 BNC 09:40 66 Y 8 3124 0 0 0 3124 3124 0 0

55 76553 DEMU SBC DPJ 152 SBC 18:30 HSRA 19:36 60.59 Y 8 2868 0 0 0 2868 2868 0 0

56 76554 DEMU DPJ SBC 152 HSRA 06:33 SBC 08:10 60.59 Y 8 2868 0 0 0 2868 2868 0 0

Total → 18 12 26 204778 134124 53176 35452 101116 323868 1964 826.42

Rakes required to replace existing services (@ 1 per 500 Rake Km) → 3.928 1.653

After adding 20% maintenance spare→ 4.714 1.984

Rounding off → 5 2



Annexure: 5 Cost Estimates in a Nutshell

S.

No Activity

Rate

(in Cr) Per

YPR-BYPL BYPL-

HSRA

SBC-

YPR

YPR-

TK

YPR-

YNK

YNK-

CBP

YNK-

BYPL

YNK-

DBU

SVDL-

Kunigal

SBC-

BYPL

BYPL-

BWT

SBC-

MYA Total

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

Qty

Am

ou

nt

(Cr)

1

16 car MEMUs (for

replacing exg.

services)

21 Rake

0.75 16.00 1.25 26.00 3.00 63 5 105

2 Doubling 12 Km 16.12 194 48.59 583

46.05 553

20.72 249 45.20 542

177 2121

3 Electrification 1.25 Km 32.24 40 97.18 121 10.70 13 128.00 160

92.10 115

20.72 26 90.40 113

471 588

4 Auto Signalling etc. 0.75 Km 16.12 12 48.59 36 5.35 4 64.00 48 12.45 9 46.05 35 19.23 14 20.72 16 45.20 34 10.76 8 59.45 45 92.88 70 441 331

5 Extension/ Rising

of PFs 3 Stn 2 6 4.00 12 1.00 3 10.00 30 2.00 6 6.00 18 1.00 3 1.00 3 3.00 9 3.00 9 8.00 24 12.00 36 53 159

6 Facilities at

Terminals 15 Stn 1 15 1.00 15

1.00 15 1.00 15 1.00 15

1.00 15 1.00 15

1.00 15 1.00 15 9 135

7 Addl. lines at

Stations 10 Line 1 10 4.00 40

5.00 50

3.00 30 1.00 10 3.00 30 4.00 40 2.00 20 6.00 60 7.00 70 36 360

8 Facilities at Exg.

Stations 10 Stn 2 20 4.00 40 1.00 10 10.00 100 2.00 20 6.00 60 1.00 10 1.00 10 3.00 30 3.00 30 8.00 80 12.00 120 53 530

9

9 car EMUs (for

Replacing Exg.

services)

36 Rake

0.08 3 0.92 33 0.21 8 0.79 28

2 72

10 9 car EMUs (for

new services) 36 Rake 2.5 90 7.51 270 0.23 8 2.77 100 0.64 23 2.36 85 1.44 52 1.56 56 1.00 36 0.15 6 0.85 30 3.00 108 24 864

11 Developing New

Halt Stations 15 Stn 9 135 9.00 135 1.00 15 11.00 165 3.00 45 3.00 45 7.00 105 3.00 45 4.00 60 1.00 15 7.00 105 14.00 210 72 1080

12 EMUs Conversion

(9 to 15 car) 24 Rake 2.5 60 7.51 180 0.31 7 3.69 89 0.85 20 3.15 76 1.44 35 1.56 37 1.00 24 0.15 4 0.85 20 3.00 72 26 624

Total cost of Sections 582 1432 63 790 146 1060 229 487 903 108 405 764 6969

Development of EMU cum MEMU maintenance shed at BAND --> 200

Note

Phase Cost

Development of additional pit lines at YPR --> 20

Cost of Binny Mill Land is

not included in the

estimates

1A 173

SBC yard remodelling duly including Binny Mill Land --> 370

1 3831

Development of pit lines, PFs etc. (4 pit lines proposed in Phase 1A Balance 6 pit lines, stabling lines PFs etc.) at BYPLN --> 200

2 2251

Developing Hejjala 4th Coaching Terminal--> 200

3 2504

Bypass Line connecting DBU and CBP lines --> 300

Total 8759

Quadrupling between SBC and WFD --> 500


Total Cost (Sections Cost + Terminals Cost) → 8759



Annexure: 6 EMU Rakes requirement for New Services

From To

Distance (Km)

No of

Commuter Services at

present

Additional Services required

EMUs required for Additional

Services

1 SBC MYA 92.88 10 10 1.858

2 SBC YPR 5.35 18 16 0.171

3 YPR TK 64 14 18 2.304

4 YPR YNK 12.45 6 4 0.1

5 YNK BYPL 19.23 2 26 1

6 YPR BYPL 16.12 0 28 0.903

7 YNK DBU 20.72 4 34 1.409

8 YNK CBP 46.05 4 26 2.395

9 BYPL HSRA 48.59 6 80 7.774

10 SBC BYPL 12 24 8 0.192

11 BYPL BWT 58.21 18 0 0

12 SDVL Kunigal 45.2 0 16 1.446

Total --> 440.8 106 266 19.552

Add 20% for maintenance spares --> 3.910

Total Requirement --> 24

Phase Rakes

1 16

2 8

3 0 (In phase 3, no additional rakes proposed. Only extension of rakes from 9 to 15 cars is proposed)

Total 24



Annexure: 7 Hourly Distribution of total scheduled trains running in CRS network at present

S.No Section 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18 18-19 19-20 20-21 21-22 TOTAL

1 SBC - MYA 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 16

MYA - SBC 1 1 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 18

2 SBC - YPR 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 4 14

YPR - SBC 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 11

3 YPR - TK 0 3 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 3 18

TK - YPR 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2 1 17

4 YPR - YNK 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 3 1 1 2 0 12

YNK - YPR 0 2 1 1 4 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 13

5 BYPL - YNK 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 9

YNK - BYPL 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 9

6 BYPL - YPR 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 3 0 11

YPR - BYPL 2 0 1 3 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 11

7 YNK - DBU 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 3 3 1 2 3 2 23

DBU - YNK 3 2 1 3 3 2 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 23

8 YNK - CBP 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2

CBP - YNK 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

9 BYPL/BYPLA - HSRA 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 2 8

HSRA - BYPL/BYPLA 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 9

10 SBC/BNC - BYPL 1 3 2 2 3 2 0 1 2 3 1 2 5 4 3 2 2 38

BYPL - SBC/BNC 5 3 2 5 2 1 3 3 1 1 0 2 1 2 3 1 3 38

11 BYPL - BWT 0 4 1 3 4 4 3 1 1 2 1 2 6 2 3 2 0 39

BWT - BYPL 2 5 2 3 2 4 1 1 0 3 2 1 0 3 4 3 2 38

12 SVDL - Kunigal 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Kunigal - SVDL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1



Annexure: 8 Hourly distribution of commuter trains running at present


1 SBC - MYA 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 5

MYA - SBC 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 5

2 SBC - YPR 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 7

YPR - SBC 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 7

3 YPR - TK 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 6

TK - YPR 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 6

4 YPR - YNK 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 3

YNK - YPR 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3

5 BYPL - YNK 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

YNK - BYPL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

6 BYPL - YPR 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

YPR - BYPL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

7 YNK - DBU 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2

DBU - YNK 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

8 YNK - CBP 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2

CBP - YNK 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

9 BYPL/BYPLA - HSRA 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 3

HSRA - BYPL/BYPLA 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3

10 SBC/BNC - BYPL 0 0 2 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 13

BYPL - SBC/BNC 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 10

11 BYPL - BWT 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 10

BWT - BYPL 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 10

12 SVDL - Kunigal 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Kunigal - SVDL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1



Annexure: 9 Hourly distribution of assessed potential for introducing additional services after proposed investments


1 SBC - MYA 0 1 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 1 1 2 3 3 3 2 1 30

MYA - SBC 1 3 3 3 2 3 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 30

2 SBC - YPR 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 20

YPR - SBC 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20

3 YPR - TK 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 1 30

TK - YPR 1 3 3 3 3 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 30

4 YPR - YNK 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 20

YNK - YPR 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 20

5 BYPL - YNK 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 2 3 3 2 2 2 30

YNK - BYPL 2 2 2 2 2 3 1 1 2 2 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 30

6 BYPL - YPR 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 20

YPR - BYPL 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 20

7 YNK - DBU 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 3 2 2 3 3 2 2 30

DBU - YNK 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 30

8 YNK - CBP 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 2 2 30

CBP - YNK 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 30

9 BYPL/BYPLA - HSRA 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 45

HSRA - BYPL/BYPLA 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 1 1 1 3 4 2 3 2 3 3 45

10 SBC/BNC - BYPL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 2 0 1 2 2 2 20

BYPL - SBC/BNC 0 1 2 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 0 20

11 BYPL - BWT 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 1 0 1 2 2 0 2 2 2 1 20

BWT - BYPL 1 0 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 20

12 SVDL - Kunigal 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 30

Kunigal - SVDL 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 30

Implementation of Commuter Rail System for Bangalore Final Report (June 2012)


Annexure: 10 ROBs with TVUs more than 50000

ROBs with TVUs more than 50000

Sl. No. Section Block

Section LC No.

Location Attached

to Stn Census

Dt TVU

1 JTJ-SBC BYPL-BNC 136 345/800-900 BYPL Jun-06 1141760

2 SBC-MYA HJL-BID 24 26/000-100 HJL Jan-10 716416

3 SBC-MYA HJL-BID 26 27/600-700 BID Jan-10 715968

4 JTJ-SBC WFD-KJM 133 337/300-400 SGWF Dec-09 670444

5 SBC-TK YPR-BAW 4 7/500 - 600 YPR Feb-09 580420

6 YNK-DBU RNN-DBU 27 33/600-700 DBU Nov-09 475106

7 YNK-BYPL CSDR-YNK 5 4/800-900 CSDR Nov-09 411216

8 JTJ-SBC BYPL-BNC 137 347/100-200 BYPL Jun-07 366160

9 JTJ-SBC KJM-BYPL 134 343/000-100 KJM Dec-09 363617

10 JTJ-SBC WFD YARD 131 332/000-100 WFD Dec-09 305531

11 JTJ-SBC DKN-WFD 130 330/200-300 WFD Dec-09 283782

12 YNK-CBP YNK-DHL 14 18/800-900 DHL Nov '09 240000

13 SBC-MYA SBC-NYH 5 4/500-600 SBC Jan-10 239168

14 YPR-YNK YPR-YNK 11 15/700-800 YNK Sep '09 223460

15 SBC-TK KIAT-TK 40 67/700-800 TK Dec '09 193260

16 JTJ-SBC BFW-TCL 120 298/100-200 TCL Nov.09 190876

17 SBC-MYA SBC-NYH 4 3/800-900 SBC Jan-10 173504

18 JTJ-SBC BWT-MZV 116 286/800-900 BWT Nov.09 171116

19 SBC-MYA RMGM-CPT 37 44/500-600 RMGM Jan-10 168128


21 JTJ-SBC DKN-WFD 129 325/400-500 DKN Dec-09 159617

22 SBC-TK KIAT-TK 41 68/600-700 TK Jan '10 153031

23 YNK-DBU YNK-RNN 21 24/600-700 RNN Nov-09 140209

24 BYPL-HSRA HLE - CRLM 131 192/600-700 CRLM Sep-09 139936

25 BYPL-HSRA HLE - CRLM 125 185/600-700 HLE Oct' 08 138892

26 SBC-TK GHL-DBL 16 26/800-900 GHL Dec-09 134520

27 SBC-MYA NYH-KGI 10 10/900-11/000 KGI Jan-10 134112

28 YPR-BYPL BAND - HEB 142 212/600-700 BAND Nov-09 126568

29 YPR-YNK YPR-YNK 5 8/600-700 YPR Mar '08 120303

30 BYPL-HSRA CRLM - BYPL 136 203/100-200 BYPL Nov-09 117369

31 YPR-YNK YPR-YNK 4A 8/100-200 YPR Mar '08 115448

32 SBC-MYA KGI-HJL 16 17/500-600 KGI Jan-10 108432

33 YPR-YNK YPR-YNK 10 12/300-400 YPR Sep '09 105454

34 YNK-CBP DHL-CBP 39 43/700-800 CBP Nov '09 105000

35 SBC-TK KIAT-TK 37 64/200-300 KIAT Nov. 09 97585

Implementation of Commuter Rail System for Bangalore Final Report (June 2012)


ROBs with TVUs more than 50000

Sl. No. Section Block

Section LC No.

Location Attached

to Stn Census

Dt TVU


37 YNK-BYPL CSDR-YNK 11 13/300-400 YNK Nov-09 89136

38 BYPL-HSRA HSRA-AEK 114 173/900-174/00 AEK Oct' 08 83412

39 BYPL-HSRA HSRA-AEK 104 160/000-100 HSRA Nov-09 71622

40 BYPL-HSRA AEK-HLE 120 182/400-500 HLE Nov-09 68149


42 SBC-MYA RMGM-CPT 47 55/200-300 CPT Jan-10 66592

43 SBC-YPR SBC-YPR 2 4/200-300 YPR Feb-09 66080

44 SBC-MYA SBC-NYH 2 1/900-2/000 SBC Jan-10 65984

45 YPR-BYPL BAND - HEB 144A 214/400-500 BAND Nov-09 64124

46 SBC-TK KIAT-TK 38 65/300-400 KIAT Nov. 09 58150

47 SBC-TK YPR-BAW 6 12/000-100 BAW Feb-09 53960

48 YPR-YNK YPR-YNK 9 11/300-400 YPR Sep '09 53920


50 SBC-TK KIAT-TK 39 66/200-300 KIAT Jan '09 52160

51 SBC-MYA SET-MAD 58 72/100-200 MAD Dec.09 51470

52 YNK-DBU RNN-DBU 25 32/100-200 RNN Nov-09 50135

53 SBC-TK HHL-KIAT 35 62/400-500 KIAT Mar'08 50010

contentsurbantransport.kar.gov.in/bangalore_crs_final_report.pdfimplementation of commuter rail...

Documents