feasibility study for a public transport system for...

Feasibility Study for a Public Feasibility Study for a Public Transport System for DamascusTransport System for Damascus

September 2006September 2006

Urban Transport for sustainable cities: Shaping cities for and with people Lessons learned from France

Feasibility Study for a Mass Transit System for Damascus Feasibility Study for a Mass Transit System for Damascus Syrian Arab Republic Syrian Arab Republic -- Damascus GovernorateDamascus Governorate

Study TasksStudy Tasks

Selection of Selection of Corridor (s)Corridor (s)Task 1Task 1

Selection of Selection of AlternativesAlternativesTask 2Task 2

Evaluation of Evaluation of AlternativesAlternativesTask 3Task 3

Development of Development of ProposalProposalTask 4Task 4

Implementation Implementation StrategyStrategyTask 5Task 5

Ranked classification of corridorsSelection of priority corridor(s)

Selection of three technologies to be evaluated for the priority corridor(s) General Master Plan for the Mass Public Transit SystemPriority corridor and technology selection

Operational design of the priority corridor

Implementation action plan

FASEPFASEPFASEP

Next stepsNext stepsNext steps


Demand Forecasts. Damascus Demand Forecasts. Damascus Population and Employment ProjectionsPopulation and Employment Projections

Task 1 : Selection of corridorsTask 1 : Selection of corridors

Damascus rural areas

Damascus Governorate

1994 2001 2020

1.39 1.57 2.0

Inhabitants(million)

1.34 1.99 5.1

2001 2020

0.7

Employment(million)

0.5 2.0

1.0

Public transport trips(boarding do nothing supply scenario) 2.63 6.53


Procedure for Selecting Priority Mass Transit Procedure for Selecting Priority Mass Transit CorridorsCorridors Identify elemental corridorsIdentify elemental corridors

Analyze elemental corridors and Analyze elemental corridors and assemble into transport corridorsassemble into transport corridorsSelect potential mass transit corridorsSelect potential mass transit corridorsSelect priority mass transit corridorsSelect priority mass transit corridors


Cover the totality of densely urbanized areasCover the totality of densely urbanized areasFollow main transport right of waysFollow main transport right of waysCover desired transport lines Cover desired transport lines (most important (most important origins and destinations)origins and destinations)

Avoid, to the extent possible, antiquities sitesAvoid, to the extent possible, antiquities sites

Criteria for Identifying Elemental CorridorsCriteria for Identifying Elemental Corridors


Urbanized Urbanized Areas in Areas in

Study areaStudy area


Urbanized Urbanized Areas in Areas in Damascus Damascus GovernorateGovernorate


Arterial distributor Main distributor Secondary distributor

Road to Qatana

International Airport Road

Road to Ma'raba, At Tal

Othman Bin 'Affan Street

Road to Aleppo

Beirut Road

Road to Zabadani, Beirut

Fayez Mansoor Street

Hafez El Assad Road

Primary Road Network SystemPrimary Road Network System



Desired Transport Lines Desired Transport Lines in Damascus in Damascus GovernorateGovernorate

3

98

1

2

45

6

7

1043

00 (7

8800

)

24700 (18900)

50600 (37800)

7910

0 (5

8100

)

8300

(600

0)

98000 (69600)

27500 (19900) 82400 (61900)

Radial desired lines


98

3

12000 (8900)

700 (500)

5500

(410

0)

1800 (1400)

2700

(200

0)

7500

(570

0)

1

2

45

6

7

11000 (7200)

31900 (23600) 8500 (6700)

3350

0 (2

5900

)

39300 (27900)

3110

0 (2

2900

)

3800

(290

0)9900 (7300)

7400 (5700)

1140

0 (82

00)

14300 (10700)2000 (1500)

16900 (12500)

4500 (3300)

3700 (2700)

36400 (28200)

31000 (23900)

5300 (3900)

5400 (3900)

900 (700)

3800 (2500)

7500 (5700)

Concentric desired lines


146 elemental corridors were selected

Task 1 : Selection of corridorsTask 1 : Selection of corridorsElemental Elemental CorridorsCorridors

Coverage of Coverage of Elemental CorridorsElemental Corridors


Not at scale

Green Line - 1: Mezzeh–QabounRed Line – 2: Barzeh–MukhayyanBlue Line – 3: Kadam–JaubarOrange Line – 4: Dummar–Jaramana

Green Line 1Green Line 1


Red Line 2Red Line 2

Red Line 2Red Line 2Blue Line 3Blue Line 3

Blue Line 3Blue Line 3

Orange Line 4Orange Line 4


Barzeh

Qaboun

Jaubar

Dummar

Mezzeh

Kadam Mukhayyan

Jaramana

Task 1 : Selection of corridorsTask 1 : Selection of corridorsProposed Mass Transit Lines to evaluateProposed Mass Transit Lines to evaluate


Population Population and and Employment Employment within the within the Area of Area of Influence of Influence of Mass Transit Mass Transit LinesLines 0

100,000200,000

300,000400,000

500,000600,000700,000

800,000900,000

GreenLine

Red Line Blue Line OrangeLine

EmploymentPopulation

Area of influence: 470 meters at both sides of the line’s axis.

Red Line Red Line and Green and Green Line have Line have the the highest highest coveragecoverage



476

688

89235

311 484338

867

921

1280 250

760

1114

1516

528

600200

400

435

381103

36935352001118

925

565895

626

289

75

428

1832738

1597

770

Not at scale

2,340

2,120

2,150

2,040

600

1,410

1,370

1,430

4,4603,580

2,640 2,780

0500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500

Green Line Red Line Blue Line OrangeLine

Green Line and Red Line are the most heavily used public Green Line and Red Line are the most heavily used public transport corridorstransport corridors


2002 2002 Morning Morning Peak Hour Peak Hour Microbuses Microbuses by Mass by Mass Transit LineTransit Line


Mass Transit Mass Transit Line by Line by Distribution Distribution of Alignment of Alignment by Possible by Possible Level of Level of Insertion Insertion DifficultyDifficulty

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

GreenLine

Red Line Blue Line OrangeLine

Very HighHighMediumLowVery Low

Green Line Green Line and Red and Red Line would Line would have the have the least least insertion insertion difficultiesdifficulties



Not at scale

Green Line - 1: Mezzeh–QabounRed Line – 2: Barzeh–MukhayyanBlue Line – 3: Kadam–JaubarOrange Line – 4: Dummar–Jaramana



Red Line 2Red Line 2

Red Line 2Red Line 2Blue Line 3Blue Line 3

Blue Line 3Blue Line 3



Barzeh

Qaboun

Jaubar

Dummar

Mezzeh

Kadam Mukhayyan

Jaramana


……the the Green Green LineLine

and,and,thethe Red LineRed Line

were chosen as were chosen as priority mass priority mass transit transit corridorscorridors..

After analyses of socioeconomic, total and public transport trafAfter analyses of socioeconomic, total and public transport traffic, and fic, and physical conditions of corridors, physical conditions of corridors, …………


Contrasted analysis of five technologiesContrasted analysis of five technologiesBus (standard and articulated)Bus (standard and articulated)TrolleybusTrolleybusTramwayTramwayLight rail metroLight rail metroHeavy rail metroHeavy rail metro

Selection of three technologies per Selection of three technologies per corridorcorridorStudy of the three technologiesStudy of the three technologies

Task 2 : Selection of alternativesTask 2 : Selection of alternatives

(Alternative = 1 corridor+1 technology)(Alternative = 1 corridor+1 technology)


Contrasted Analysis of technologiesContrasted Analysis of technologies

Heavy rail metro

Light rail metro

Tramway

Trolleybus

Articulated bus on busway

Standard bus on busway

MultipleSuppliers

Possibilityto Expand

ProvenTechno-

logy

InsertionPossibility

CapacitySelection CriteriaSystems



Selected Technologies and corridorsSelected Technologies and corridors


In total 8 alternatives analyzedIn total 8 alternatives analyzed

Corridors Technologies

Fully At -GradeTramwayPartially At-Grade

Light Rail Metro

Green Line

Red LineHeavy Rail Metro

Integration

Fully separatedFully separated

BRT is an alternative based on articulated buses operating on fuBRT is an alternative based on articulated buses operating on fully separated lly separated lanes. It cannot be integrated through Old Damascus area. lanes. It cannot be integrated through Old Damascus area.


Mass Transit Systems Passenger ForecastsMass Transit Systems Passenger Forecasts

Morning Peak Hour Daily Morning

Peak Hour Daily Morning Peak Hour Daily

Green LineTramway at-Grade 9,450 263,608 13,920 364,093 14,430 513,939Tramway Partially At-Grade 10,850 302,754 15,990 418,161 16,570 590,259Light Rail Metro 11,660 325,292 17,180 449,291 17,810 634,201Heavy Rail Metro 11,660 325,292 17,180 449,291 17,810 634,201

Red LineTramway at-Grade 6,920 200,168 9,220 234,015 6,600 177,456Tramway Partially At-Grade 7,750 224,308 10,330 262,237 7,400 198,857Light Rail Metro 8,790 254,394 11,720 297,410 8,390 225,529Heavy Rail Metro 8,790 254,394 11,720 297,410 8,390 225,529

Source: Own estimates.

Corredor / Technology

2005 2010 2020

Note: Morning peak hour : In direction towards Damascus

Assumes:2005: Green Line or Red Line only2010: Green Line and Red Line2020: Green Line, Red Line and other mass transit services. If no other mass transit services, the minimum morning peak hour and direction passengers increase to:Green Line: 23,300Red Line: 10,600

Task 3 : Evaluation of alternativesTask 3 : Evaluation of alternatives

JICA model from “Study on Urban Transportation Planning for Damascus City”Traffic counts and surveys (BCEOM)


Tramway AlignmentTramway Alignment

Two vertical alignment optionsTwo vertical alignment optionsFully AtFully At--Grade TramwayGrade TramwayPartially AtPartially At--Grade TramwayGrade Tramway

Several horizontal alignment options in the Several horizontal alignment options in the Green LineGreen Line



Old Town Gardens and parks Residential Commercial and residentialSouks and shops Government offices Cultural Industrial

Legend:

Alignment

Optional Alignment

Station

Tramway Alignment OptionsTramway Alignment Options



Old Town Gardens and parks Residential Commercial and residential Souks and shops Government offices Cultural Industrial

Legend:

Alignment

Optional Alignment

Station

POSSIBLE START/END OF TUNNEL












Green LineFully At-Grade: 15.4 kmPartially At-Grade

At-grade section: 11.5 kmUnderground: 3.3

Red LineFully At-Grade: 10.5 kmPartially At-Grade

At-grade section: 7.1 kmUnderground: 3.4


Tramway Tramway Alignment Alignment

in the in the Centre Centre AreaArea


Tramway Typical Cross SectionsTramway Typical Cross Sections

Project Cross section Central Integration

Lateral station

5.0 7.0 7.0 4.17.03.0

Actual cross section

5.0 9.3 9.3 8.11.4

Faez Mansour Motorway, Faculty of Letters 29th May Street



Examples of Possible AtExamples of Possible At--Grade Tramway InsertionsGrade Tramway Insertions

HalabHalabStreetStreet

AbdelAbdel RahmanRahmanGhafikiGhafiki StreetStreet



POSSIBLE START/END OF VIADUCT


POSSIBLE START/END OF TBM TUNNEL

POSSIBLE START/END OF TBM TUNNEL



POSSIBLE START/END OF TBM TUNNEL AND BEGIN/END OF CUT AND COVER TUNNEL






Green Line:At-grade section: 2.6 kmElevated: 3.2 kmCut and cover tunnel: 2.5 kmTBM tunnel: 6.5 km

Red Line:Cut and cover tunnel: 7.4 kmTBM tunnel: 3.0 km

Old TownGardens and parksResidentialCommercial and residentialSouks and shopsGovernment officesCulturalIndustrial

Legend:

TBM tunnel

ViaductAt GradeStation

Cut and cover tunnel

Metro AlignmentsMetro Alignments



Old TownGardens and parksResidentialCommercial and residentialSouks and shopsGovernment officesCulturalIndustrial

Legend:

TBM tunnel

ViaductAt Grade

Station

Cut and cover tunnel

Metro Alignments in Metro Alignments in Centre AreasCentre Areas



DescriptionDescription

Insertion and infrastructureInsertion and infrastructureOperationOperationCostsCostsGeneral qualityGeneral qualityImplementation issuesImplementation issues



AssumptionsAssumptions

Alternatives are evaluated within an Alternatives are evaluated within an integrated and integrated and reorganisedreorganised route route networknetworkMicrobuses are assigned to feeder Microbuses are assigned to feeder routesroutes



Insertion and Insertion and InfrastructureInfrastructure

Corridor/Technology Length (kms) Stations

Average Distance Between Stations

Insertion M ethod

Use of Right of

W ay Energy

Platform width

(m)

At-G rade

Insertion (kms)

G reen Line Corridor

Tramway at-G rade 15.4 23 698 Fully At-Grade

Shared at intersections

Electric 750 V.

Catenaries 7.0 15.4

Tramway Partially At-G rade 14.9 22 707 Partially

At-Grade

Partially shared at

intersections

Electric 750 V.

Catenaries 7.0 11.5

Light Rail M etro 14.9 22 707 Fully Separated Not shared

Electric 750 V.

Third rail 7.0 2.6

H eavy Rail Metro 14.9 22 707 Fully Separated Not shared

Electric 750 V.

Third rail 7.0 2.6

Red Line Corridor

Tramway at-G rade 10.5 23 477 Fully At-Grade

Shared at intersections

Electric 750 V.

Catenaries 7.0 10.5

Tramway Partially At-G rade 10.5 22 477 Partially

At-Grade

Partially shared at

intersections

Electric 750 V.

Catenaries 7.0 7.4

Light Rail M etro 10.4 22 498 Fully Separated Not shared

Electric 750 V.

Third rail 7.0 0.0

H eavy Rail Metro 10.4 22 498 Fully Separated Not shared

Electric 750 V.

Third rail 7.0 0.0



Operational CharacteristicsOperational Characteristics

Corridor/Technology

Peak Hour and

Direction Demand (2010)

Peak Period

Headway (2010 in minutes)

Commercial Speed (km/h)

Number of

Trains (2010)

Length of

Train (m)

Train Capacity

Train Kilometres (million in

2010)

Seat Kilometres (million in

2010)

Green Line Corridor

Tramway at-Grade 13,920 2.45 24 41 60 550 3.46 1,901

Tramway Partially At-Grade 15,990 2.00 28 41 60 550 3.87 2,130

Light Rail Metro 17,180 3.75 30 27 100 900 2.34 2,107

Heavy Rail Metro 17,180 3.75 30 27 120 1,100 2.34 2,575

Red Line Corridor

Tramway at-Grade 9,220 3.50 19 27 60 550 2.35 1,293

Tramway Partially At-Grade 10,330 3.00 21 27 60 550 2.56 1,406

Light Rail Metro 11,720 4.00 24 18 100 900 1.83 1,645

Heavy Rail Metro 11,720 5.00 24 15 120 1,100 1.70 1,874



Cost CharacteristicsCost CharacteristicsInvestment Costs Investment Costs per

Km of Line Annual Operating and Maintenance

Costs (2010) Corridor/Technology

Line Work (M USD)

Total (M USD)

Line Work (M USD)

Total (M USD)

Total (M USD)

Per Seat Km

Offered

Per Passenger

Green Line Corridor

Tramway at-Grade 89.20 233.05 5.81 15.18 10.78 0.0057 0.087

Tramway Partially At-Grade 154.11 300.43 10.38 20.24 12.20 0.0057 0.086

Light Rail Metro 670.97 935,92 45.20 63.04 22.17 0.0102 0.145

Heavy Rail Metro 700.32 1,024.57 47.17 69.01 22.93 0.0098 0.150

Red Line Corridor

Tramway at-Grade 56.00 166.32 5.34 15.84 7.65 0.0059 0.096

Tramway Partially At-Grade 128,73 239.05 12.34 22.91 8.50 0.0060 0.095

Light Rail Metro 507.45 692.40 48.64 66.37 16.93 0.0103 0.167

Heavy Rail Metro 528,86 728.12 50.69 69.79 18.17 0.0097 0.180



General Quality CharacteristicsGeneral Quality Characteristics

Corridor/Technology Reliability Comfort Waiting Time

Expansion Flexibility

Green Line Corridor

Tramway at-Grade

Tramway Partially At-Grade

Light Rail Metro

Heavy Rail Metro

Red Line Corridor

Tramway at-Grade


Light Rail Metro

Heavy Rail Metro



Easiness of ImplementationEasiness of Implementation

Corridor/Technology Complexity

of Technology

Institutional Change

Initial Resources

Duration of Construction

Green Line Corridor

Tramway at-Grade


Light Rail Metro

Heavy Rail Metro

Red Line Corridor

Tramway at-Grade


Light Rail Metro

Heavy Rail Metro



ResultsResults

Technical and environmental Technical and environmental aspectsaspectsEconomic aspectsEconomic aspectsFinancial aspectsFinancial aspects



Technical and Environmental AspectsTechnical and Environmental AspectsThe metro alternativesThe metro alternatives……

Are more attractive in terms of insertion, infrastructure, generAre more attractive in terms of insertion, infrastructure, general quality and al quality and environmental impactsenvironmental impactsSurpass the demands needs of the next twenty years, if other masSurpass the demands needs of the next twenty years, if other mass transit s transit services are also builtservices are also builtAre several orders of magnitude more expensive than the tramway Are several orders of magnitude more expensive than the tramway alternativesalternativesPhase important implementation obstacles to overcomePhase important implementation obstacles to overcome

The tramway alternativesThe tramway alternatives……Are least expensive and phase lower implementation obstaclesAre least expensive and phase lower implementation obstaclesService demand needs to acceptable levels, if other mass transitService demand needs to acceptable levels, if other mass transit services are services are also built; otherwise, they would phase capacity limitationsalso built; otherwise, they would phase capacity limitationsWith the inclusion of cut and cover tunnel sections and creativeWith the inclusion of cut and cover tunnel sections and creative urban urban insertion, can reduce the insertion, infrastructure, operations insertion, can reduce the insertion, infrastructure, operations and and environmental impacts drawbacksenvironmental impacts drawbacks



Economic AspectsEconomic AspectsThe Green Line is The Green Line is the preferred the preferred corridorcorridor

The preferred The preferred technology is the Fully technology is the Fully AtAt--Grade TramwayGrade Tramway

But the Partially AtBut the Partially At--Grade Tramway is Grade Tramway is also acceptablealso acceptable

Green LineTramway at-Grade 216.43 1.87 19.7%Tramway Partially At-Grade 219.32 1.76 18.3%Light Rail Metro -187.88 0.70 9.4%Heavy Rail Metro -247.70 0.64 8.7%

Red LineTramway at-Grade -26.78 0.84 9.7%Tramway Partially At-Grade -69.19 0.67 7.5%Light Rail Metro -344.49 0.23 0.5%Heavy Rail Metro -368.68 0.22 0.0%

NPV at a 12% discount rate.


Net Present Value - NPV

(Million USD)

Benefit Cost Ratio - B/C

Internal Rate of Return - IRRCorredor / Technology

The metro alternatives The metro alternatives for the Green Line for the Green Line may also be may also be acceptable with the acceptable with the inclusion of noninclusion of non--quantified benefitsquantified benefits



Financial Aspects Financial Aspects –– Tariffs (in USD)Tariffs (in USD)Public: If the Tariff Operating Costs is applied, investments will need to be fully financed with public subsidies Operating concession

Private with subsidy: If the Tariff Covering Equipment Operating Costs is applied, civil works will need to be financed with public subsidies

Private without subsidy: If the Tariff Covering All Costs is applied, no public subsidies are needed Global BOT


Tariff - CoveringOperating costs

Tariff - CoveringEquipement andOperating Costs

Tariff - Covering

all Costs

At-Grade Tramway 0.07 0.26 0.35

Partially At-Grade Tramway 0.07 0.24 0.38

Light rail Metro System 0.10 0.44 1.07

Heavy rail Metro System 0.11 0.52 1.17

At-Grade Tramway 0.10 0.40 0.53

Partially At-Grade Tramway 0.10 0.39 0.67

Light rail Metro System 0.19 0.86 2.25

Heavy rail Metro System 0.20 0.92 2.37

Corridor / TechnologicalAlternatives

Green Line

Red Line


Financial Aspects Financial Aspects –– Government Subsidy (million USD) Government Subsidy (million USD) at a fare set of USD 0.20.at a fare set of USD 0.20.

Current Governorate ofDamascus road budget: USD 30 million

Green Line Red Line Technology Total Annual Total Annual

Fully at-Grade Tramway 133 26.6 129 25.8

Partially At-Grade Tramway 187 31.2 240 40.0

Light Rail Metro 905 90.5 748 74.8

Heavy Rail Metro 1,016 101.6 791 79.1

With the exception of possibly Hong Kong, all mass transit projects require government commitment and they are justified based on their social benefits, not their financial performance.



Comparative AnalysisComparative Analysis

Green line mass transit alternativesGreen line mass transit alternativesRed Line mass transit alternativesRed Line mass transit alternativesComparison of Green Line and Red Comparison of Green Line and Red LineLine



Green Line Green Line Mass Transit Mass Transit AlternativesAlternatives

Evaluation ElementFully At-

Grade Tramway

Partially At-Grade

Tramway

Light Rail Metro

Heavy Rail Metro

Improvement of the Transport OrganizationSatisfy public transport demand (2005 daily boarding) 263,608 302,754 325,292 325,292Constitute a credible public transport alternative

Train comfort High High High HighStation comfort High High High HighSpeed Low Medium High HighEasy of displacement Medium Medium Low Low

Enhancement of the Urban EnvironmentContribute to the renovation of central areas High Medium Low LowContribute to maintaining the city's cultural heritage Low Medium High HighContribute to the preservation of the environment Low Medium High High

Viability of ImplementationOptimal use of limited resources

Investment costs ( million USD net of interests) 233 300 936 1,025Net Present Value (million USD) 216 219 -188 -248IRR 19.7% 18.3% 9.4% 8.7%

Within Institutional and technical capabilities High Medium Low LowSocial acceptability

Fare to cover operating costs 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.11Fare to cover operating and equipment costs 0.26 0.24 0.44 0.52Fare to cover total costs 0.35 0.38 1.07 1.17

Financial viability (M USD subsidy at a fare of USD 0.20) 133 187 905 1,016




Metro Alternatives in the Green LineMetro Alternatives in the Green Line

Both systems constitute credible public transport alternatives

The metro alternative would better maintain the existing urban structure, while positively contributing to reducing air and noise pollutions with few negative environmental impacts

The Light Rail Metro can be scaled down to demand needs and reduce investment costs and expand as needed



Tramway Alternative in the Green LineTramway Alternative in the Green Line

Tramway also constitutes credible public transport alternativeThe insertion of a tramway at-grade could serve as a catalyst for the renovation of central areas. Tunnel sections would reduce the negative environmental impacts in the critical areas

For a successful tramway insertion in Damascus, other mass transit services and traffic management initiatives are required



Red Line Mass Transit AlternativesRed Line Mass Transit AlternativesEvaluation Element

Fully At-Grade

Tramway

Partially At-Grade

Tramway

Light Rail Metro

Heavy Rail Metro

Improvement of the Transport OrganizationSatisfy public transport demand (2005 daily boarding) 200,168 224,308 254,394 254,394Constitute a credible public transport alternative

Train comfort High High High HighStation comfort High High High HighSpeed Low Medium High HighEasy of displacement Medium Medium Low Low

Enhancement of the Urban EnvironmentContribute to the renovation of central areas High Medium Low LowContribute to maintaining the city's cultural heritage Low Medium High HighContribute to the preservation of the environment Low Medium High High


Investment costs ( million USD net of interests) 166 239 692 728Net Present Value (million USD) -27.00 -69.00 -344.00 -369.00IRR 9.7% 7.5% 0.5% 0.0%

Within Institutional and technical capabilities High Medium Low LowSocial acceptability

Fare to cover operating costs 0.10 0.10 0.19 0.20Fare to cover operating and equipment costs 0.40 0.39 0.86 0.92Fare to cover total costs 0.53 0.67 2.25 2.37

Financial viability (M USD subsidy at a fare of USD 0.20) 129 240 748 791


The same conclusions are drawn:

Tramway has lower costs than metro alternatives, but…

Metro alternatives offer better service and enhancement of the urban environment.



Comparison of Green Line and Red LineComparison of Green Line and Red Line

Evaluation Elements of the Fully At-Grade Tramway for the Green Line and the Red Line

The Green Line The Green Line appears to appears to have more attractive have more attractive elements than the Red Line elements than the Red Line as priority mass transit as priority mass transit corridorcorridor

Evaluation Element Green Line Red LineImprovement of the Transport Organization

Satisfy public transport demand (2005 daily boarding) 263,608 200,168Constitute a credible public transport alternative

Train comfort High HighStation comfort High HighSpeed Low LowEasy of displacement Medium Medium

Enhancement of the Urban EnvironmentContribute to the renovation of central areas High HighContribute to maintaining the city's cultural heritage Low LowContribute to the preservation of the environment Low Low


Investment costs ( million USD net of interests) 233 166Net Present Value (million USD) 216 27.00IRR 19.7% 9.7%

Within Institutional and technical capabilities High HighSocial acceptability

Fare to cover operating costs 0.07 0.10Fare to cover operating and equipment costs 0.26 0.40Fare to cover total costs 0.35 0.53

Financial viability (M USD subsidy at a fare of USD 0.20) 133 129




In ConclusionIn Conclusion……the metro systemsthe metro systems

Cost more but are more attractive in terms of technical characteCost more but are more attractive in terms of technical characteristics.ristics.Of the two metro system evaluated, the Light Rail System offers Of the two metro system evaluated, the Light Rail System offers the same the same benefits than the Heavy rail but with lower investment costs.benefits than the Heavy rail but with lower investment costs.In addition, the Light Rail Metro can start up with low capacitiIn addition, the Light Rail Metro can start up with low capacities adjusted to es adjusted to demand needs, and expand.demand needs, and expand.Are more appropriate in a city with high investment capabilitiesAre more appropriate in a city with high investment capabilities and with and with dense public transport corridors or with high growth expectationdense public transport corridors or with high growth expectations.s.They promote economies of concentration and dynamism to the cityThey promote economies of concentration and dynamism to the city and its and its activities.activities.Their main risks are related with the uncertainties of tunnel coTheir main risks are related with the uncertainties of tunnel construction and, nstruction and, in general, the construction and operation of a more complex tecin general, the construction and operation of a more complex technology, and hnology, and with its high investment costs.with its high investment costs.



In ConclusionIn Conclusion……the tramway systemthe tramway system

Cost less but is also less attractive in terms of technical charCost less but is also less attractive in terms of technical characteristics.acteristics.Its reduced carrying capacity, when compared with the metro systIts reduced carrying capacity, when compared with the metro system.em.It would be more appropriate when its part of an urban developmeIt would be more appropriate when its part of an urban development strategy nt strategy aimed at maintaining the city character, with slow growth, promoaimed at maintaining the city character, with slow growth, promotion of tion of pedestrian facilities and other urban amenities.pedestrian facilities and other urban amenities.Complemented with traffic management initiatives and other mass Complemented with traffic management initiatives and other mass transit transit services.services.Its main risks are associated with its lower carrying capacity aIts main risks are associated with its lower carrying capacity and limited nd limited expansion capabilities, with a theoretical maximum capacity closexpansion capabilities, with a theoretical maximum capacity close to 18,000 e to 18,000 passengers per hour and direction and with its difficulty to upgpassengers per hour and direction and with its difficulty to upgrade to higher rade to higher capacity systems.capacity systems.In this context, if this technology is implemented, then other mIn this context, if this technology is implemented, then other mass transit ass transit services, particularly commuter rail and express bus services toservices, particularly commuter rail and express bus services to suburban suburban communities and traffic management initiatives should be carefulcommunities and traffic management initiatives should be carefully planned ly planned and realized. and realized.



Decision and next StepsDecision and next Steps……

The Damascus Governorate selected The Damascus Governorate selected the alternative light rail metro technology the alternative light rail metro technology on the Green Line corridor. on the Green Line corridor.

The European Investment Bank decided The European Investment Bank decided to launch a tender for a technical to launch a tender for a technical assistance to specify the subsequent assistance to specify the subsequent steps of the project preparation.steps of the project preparation.


THANK YOUTHANK YOU

feasibility study for a public transport system for...

Documents