Urban Transport in the OIC Megacities
14
spaces. This poses a huge burden on public administrations to finance and build urban infrastructure
including roads, transit systems, and utilities such as water, sewerage and electricity. It is estimated
that under a Business As Usual (BAU) scenario, India’s urban growth alone will require almost 600
billion USD of investment by 2030, including 2.5 billion square metres of roads and 7,400 kmof metros
and subways. This is 20 times the capacity added in the past decade (Rode et al, 2014).
Alternatively, more cost effective forms of urban development which actively prioritise compact
urban growth, affordable mass transit and high levels of non-motorized transport use could bring
significant benefits to the current and future megacities of the developing world. Existing evidence
suggests that key urban infrastructure, particularly linear and networked infrastructures such as
streets, railways and other utilities, comes at a considerably lower cost per unit when the levels of
urban density are higher. For example, the World Bank suggests that more compact city development
in China could save up to 1.4 billion USD in infrastructure spending, equivalent to 15%of the country’s
GDP in 2013 (Rode et al 2014).
Within urban transport infrastructure provision, considerable capital cost savings can be generated
as a result of a shift away from private car infrastructure towards public transport, walking and
cycling. Furthermore, innovative urban transport systems such as Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) offer
significant cost savings compared to traditional metro and regional rail at similar capacity levels. For
example, Bogota’s TransMilenio BRT infrastructure had a capital cost of 5.8 million USD per km (or
0.34 USD per passenger), compared with estimates for metro rail of 101 million USD per km (or 2.36
USD per passenger) over three years. In addition, maintenance costs, which are frequently
underrepresented within major infrastructure cost appraisals, are substantially lower on a per capita
basis for affordable mass transit and non-motorized transport (Rode et al, 2014).
The operational costs of urban transport are also directly informed by urban formcharacteristics, with
sprawling urban development leading to higher costs and greater capital requirements relative to
higher density development. Low density urban development increases costs for both private and
public motorized transport, but it also undermines the viability of public transport provision for which
cost efficient operation is only possible above certain threshold density levels. Similarly, non-
motorized transport essentially relies on threshold densities. As a result, higher density cities have
greater opportunities for cost efficient transport provision (Rode et al, 2014).
3.3.2. Land use and urban form
3.3.2.1. Introduction
The physical separation of activities in an urban environment inevitably leads to longer distances
travelled . Coordinated transport and land use planning allows authorities to build
sustainable mobility into the patterns of urban form and layouts, which may in turn lead to a switch
to greenmodes of transport. Policies that can contribute to the reduction of distances travelled include
increasing densities and concentration through mixed use development, housing location, design of
buildings, space and route layouts, public transport oriented development and transport development
areas, car free development and establishing size thresholds for the availability of services and
facilities. It is estimated that the timescale over which sustainable mobility might be realised is similar
to the turnover of the building stock (about 2% per annum), but decisions on the location of new
housing can have dramatic effects over the lifetime of housing (Banister, 2008).