Urban Transportation

Final Report: Working Paper 19 GOPA E & A

Guyana: Transport Sector Study i

Working Paper 19: Urban Public Transport Development [Preparations for Special Study No. 1] Contents

0 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 1

1 Background ............................................................................................................................ 4

2 Current Operations................................................................................................................ 4 2.1 Ferry Services ................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 Taxi Services ................................................................................................................. 4 2.3 Private Hire Cars............................................................................................................ 5 2.4 Standard Size Buses....................................................................................................... 5 2.5 Minibus Services ........................................................................................................... 5

3 The Strategic Issues ............................................................................................................... 7 3.1 Transport Sector Regulation .......................................................................................... 7 3.2 Institutional Arrangements ............................................................................................ 7 3.3 Travel Demand and Public Transport Planning............................................................. 8 3.4 Parking Management ..................................................................................................... 8

4 Enhancement of Transport Delivery.................................................................................... 9 4.1 Operation and Control Issues......................................................................................... 9

4.1.1 Accessibility to Services...................................................................................... 9 4.1.2 Public Transport Priorities................................................................................... 9 4.1.3 Driver Behaviour ................................................................................................. 9 4.1.4 Terminal Facilities............................................................................................... 9 4.1.5 Passenger Waiting Facilities.............................................................................. 10 4.1.6 Driver and Conductor Training and Education ................................................. 10 4.1.7 Recording of Driving Offences ......................................................................... 10 4.1.8 Control and Monitoring of Activities ................................................................ 11 4.1.9 Qualifications for Drivers and Conductors........................................................ 11

4.2 Technical Issues........................................................................................................... 11 4.2.1 Vehicle Importation Arrangements ................................................................... 11 4.2.2 Comfort on Board.............................................................................................. 11 4.2.3 Vehicle Cleanliness ........................................................................................... 11 4.2.4 Use of Second-hand Tyres and Spare Parts....................................................... 11 4.2.5 Vehicle Reliability and Service Recovery......................................................... 12 4.2.6 Vehicle Sizes ..................................................................................................... 12 4.2.7 Artisan Training and Education......................................................................... 12


Guyana: Transport Sector Study ii

4.3 Financial Issues............................................................................................................ 12 4.3.1 Tariff Setting ..................................................................................................... 12 4.3.2 Financial Viability ............................................................................................. 12 4.3.3 Sector Taxation.................................................................................................. 13

4.4 Stakeholder Involvement ............................................................................................. 13 4.4.1 Passenger Representation .................................................................................. 13 4.4.2 Passenger Complaints Procedures ..................................................................... 13 4.4.3 Severely Disabled Travellers............................................................................. 13 4.4.4 Bus Operators Associations............................................................................... 14 4.4.5 Travel and Transport Information ..................................................................... 14

4.5 Existing Laws and Regulations.................................................................................... 14 4.5.1 Enforcement of Existing Traffic Rules and Regulations................................... 14 4.5.2 Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations ....................................................... 14 4.5.3 Minibus Drivers Licences.................................................................................. 15

4.6 Road Safety Issues ....................................................................................................... 15

5 Regulatory Reform Proposals............................................................................................. 16 5.1 What can be regulated?................................................................................................ 17 5.2 What are the ways regulations can be enforced? ......................................................... 18

5.2.1 Open Market and Self Regulation ..................................................................... 18 5.2.2 Route Permits .................................................................................................... 18 5.2.3 Franchising ........................................................................................................ 19 5.2.4 Services Contracting.......................................................................................... 19 5.2.5 Management Contracting .................................................................................. 19

5.3 Specific Recommendation ........................................................................................... 19

6 Institutional Reform Proposals........................................................................................... 20 6.1 Specific Recommendations.......................................................................................... 22

6.1.1 Georgetown City Council inaugurates a Public Transport Unit ........................ 22 6.1.2 Georgetown City Council be responsible for the development and promotion

of parking management strategies ..................................................................... 22 6.1.3 The Public Utilities Commission be responsible or tariff setting...................... 22 6.1.4 Profession Training in Public Transport Activities ........................................... 22

7 Proposals for Travel Demand Management...................................................................... 23 7.1 Strategic Transport Planning ....................................................................................... 23 7.2 Travel Demand Management in Georgetown.............................................................. 23 7.3 Specification of National Signage Standards............................................................... 23 7.4 Specific Recommendations.......................................................................................... 24

7.4.1 The PTU be responsible for public transport travel demand management........ 24 7.4.2 The MoPWC reviews the specification of national signage standards.............. 24


Guyana: Transport Sector Study iii

8 Local Traffic Management and Parking Activities........................................................... 25 8.1 Parking Management ................................................................................................... 25 8.2 Approved Heavy Vehicle Routes ................................................................................ 25 8.3 Markings, Signage and Control Devices ..................................................................... 25 8.4 Highway Hierarchies ................................................................................................... 26

9 Action Plans .......................................................................................................................... 26

10 Other Recommended Actions ............................................................................................. 30 10.1 Tools Needs Identified................................................................................................. 30 10.2 Technical Assistance Proposals ................................................................................... 30 10.3 Training Needs Identified ............................................................................................ 31

Tables

Table 9-1: Action Plan Summary.............................................................................................. 27

Figures

Figure 0-1: Urban Public Transport.............................................................................................. 3

Figure 5-1: Proposed Organisation of Urban Public Transport for Georgetown ....................... 18

Figure 9-1: Indicative Timeframes for Implementation ............................................................. 26

Annexes

Annex 1: Current and Proposed Institutional Arrangements................................................... 33

Annex 2: Current and Proposed Regulatory Arrangements .................................................... 35

Annex 3: Proposed Structure – Public Transport Unit ............................................................ 36

Annex 4: Public Transport – Roles and Responsibilities ........................................................ 37


Guyana: Transport Sector Study 1

0 Executive Summary

This Working Paper has been prepared as part of the Development of In-depth Study No.1 [Multi-Sector Study Urban Transport]’. This Paper should be read in conjunction with the two preceding Working Papers 10 and 14.

This Working Paper addresses the public transport issues in Georgetown today. It describes the general background and the current operations. Current operations are dominated by the informal minibus sector that provides the main public transport services, centred on the Stabroek Market terminals, both for city, suburban and long distance transport. The informal nature of current operations have served the city well for some years, but with increased traffic congestion and increased private motoring, with demand for central area parking exceeding demand throughout the working day and with higher aspirations for good service delivery, there is justified pressure for change and a better quality of transport for regular commuters. Best practice delivery of good quality public transport is dependant on providing a network of convenient and popular transport links based on up to date knowledge of the demand for transport in the city followed by the planning of networks to meet that demand. This does not reflect the existing arrangements in Georgetown. It is a relatively small capital city and any solutions must reflect the capacities of staff and other resources available and the ways in which change can be made. Section Three then briefly states the three key strategic issues relate to regulation in the sector, to introducing one institution to be responsible for the public transport delivery and of the orderly collation of transport demand data and the subsequent planning of the network of routes and operations In addition, because parking demand has already exceeded the supply of legitimate parking places throughout the working day, the need to address parking management ahs been identified. Apart from strategic issues, there are also a variety of short to medium term measures, some of which have low cost with high impact benefits on the routine activities that can be introduced. These are described in Section Four. Nine operational issues are highlighted, eight technical issues, three financial issues and five stakeholder issues plus three legal issues and also the importance of road safety promotion. However, they do require the support of the various responsible stakeholder organisations identified. Section Five describes the basis of a sound regulatory basis to enable transport networks to be developed and services provided in an orderly manner. The three activities to be regulated concern the quality and quality of services plus the responsibilities for the provision of public transport common infrastructures, such as terminals and bus stops. The options upon regulatory regimes are described with recommendation that contracting of services be investigated further



as a preferred method to maintain the benefits of competition but within an environment where the interest of the public are better reflected and represented than exist at present.

Section Six describes the institutional arrangements – whilst there are several institutions responsible for enforcing highway and traffic regulations, there is no authoritative organisation directly responsible for public transport in Georgetown. It is recommended that, rather than create yet another institution, that the responsibilities to be attached to Georgetown City Council. Local public transport in Georgetown is better suited to management by the local authority than through a central government organisation, The section describes the principal responsibilities involved, plus those connected with parking management.

Section Seven describes the need for and benefits of demand management in public transport and the ways in which it could be developed in Georgetown. The lack of knowledge of travel demand by passengers and the concentration of all routes into Stabroek Market area is of concern. A sound knowledge of demand would enable the network of routes to be planned more efficiently and for passengers to be able to choose routes that best meet their travel needs. The ways in which demand is measure and route networks planned requires a systematic approach using proven data collection and analysis techniques.

Section Eight justifies the need for better parking management in the city and top ally this with better management of heavy vehicles through the city and for the standardisation and upgradation of signage and traffic control devices.

Section Nine refers to the schedules of specific action plans that are shown in the attached tables. These are separated into strategic issues and those described in detail in Section Four. It includes comments and the allocation of responsibilities and suggested time frames.

Finally, Section Ten provides a commentary of further recommended actions to support the implementation of the plans and proposals. The main recommendations relate to nine separate short term technical assistance that would help existing organisations to introduce the proposed changes and also four areas where training or secondment of local staff is considered beneficial.

The over-arching concern is that public transport service delivery will deteriorate and commuters will absorb more of their time and more of their limited cash in using public transport because the delivery of decent reliable services will become increasingly dependant on order and priority for the services. Neither order nor priority will occur naturally, so that intervention by government is necessary to improve the public transport environment and to widen the choices available to passengers. A schematic below shows the broad timeframes within which the key actions are anticipated to be delivered.

It is important that the inauguration of the Public Transport Unit in Georgetown City Council is seen as the priority step, so that other actions concerning the development of travel demand data collection and analysis can follow and then the development of tenders, evaluation processes and the inauguration of the first of several rounds of tendering. At the same time, parking management issues can be inaugurated, again through the PTU and also Tariff setting processes assigned to the Public Utilities Commission.



Figure 0-1: Urban Public Transport



1 Background

From at least the 1960s to the 1980s a formal network of bus services were provided using conventional large buses. Initially these were publicly owned company but these services failed and were replaced by private sector owners who also eventually failed to provide suitable public transport services. Increasingly during this period, small-scale individual operators appeared using small minibuses – these have proved more suitable for the local environment and were seen as responsive to local needs. Large buses were finally abandoned in Georgetown in 1988 and since when only minibuses have been available. Georgetown is the national capital and the largest city and also the centre of the largest urban concentration in Guyana, even though the resident population is relatively small at around 300,000. In addition, it is also the legislative, judicial, government, academic and cultural centre of the country and also the national centre of medical excellence. Therefore, the interest in Georgetown transport issues attracts much greater attention than just of those who daily rely on the services actually provided. 2 Current Operations

Three modes of public transport currently co-exist in Georgetown. Minibuses appear to be the major provider, plus taxis and also river ferries that connect Georgetown with the West coast settlements on the other bank of the Demerara River. 2.1 Ferry Services

The residual ferries serving Georgetown are privately owned high-speed low capacity speedboats with limited passenger and cargo capacities. They operate from Stabroek Market area across the Demerara River Estuary to communities on the opposite shoreline. In earlier times, a publicly owned but slower ferry service connected the communities but the need for this high capacity service disappeared with the opening of the then new Demerara River Bridge in 1972. 2.2 Taxi Services

Taxi services can be considered as hail and ride taxis – where taxis are flagged down on street and also radio taxis - where a phone call to the taxi operator is made and a taxi is dispatched. Sometimes radio taxis operate also as ‘hail and ride’ taxis.



There are no designated taxi ranks in Georgetown, although there are areas near Stabroek Market where taxis traditionally congregate and other road users do not park. 2.3 Private Hire Cars

Finally, there are hire cars where clients hire the vehicle for a period of time for chauffeur driven or self-drive use. 2.4 Standard Size Buses

Large buses were operated in Georgetown up to the 1970s and 1980s and again briefly in the 1990s. However, they have not been operated as a widespread and primary public transport in the City for many years. Standard size city buses are typically 12.0 m long by 2.5 m wide and carrying [seated and standing] around 80~100 passengers, although midibuses for high volume use in cities are available that are typically 7.5 ~ 9.0 m long and 2.5 m wide. These midibuses typically carry around 45 ~ 60 passengers [seated and standing] 2.5 Minibus Services

The main public transport focus concerns the minibus operations. In Georgetown, minibuses are typically Toyota Hi-Ace and usually of 4.7 ~ 5.4 m in length and 1.9 m wide. They have a sliding door and can legally seat 9-13 passengers, dependant on length. It is stated that around 2800 minibuses are licensed to operate as public transport. Around 2,300 of these minibuses operate from Georgetown, with 3 routes entirely within the City and a further 9 routes travelling out through to the city to suburban and distant destinations. The three city routes [routes 40-41-45 have 445 authorised vehicles whilst the nine other routes from destinations beyond Georgetown have the residual 1777 vehicles. Curiously, the three city routes comprise of 9 variant destinations whilst the other 8 routes comprise 30 variant destinations. This is an unusual feature, as most cities would identify separate route numbers and route characteristics for each individual route. It is assumed that the current arrangement serves the interest of the operators in that they can individually decide which one of the variant routes is the more profitable for their hour-by-hour operations. However, this arrangement is less than helpful to passengers who need to enquire each time which variant of the route the bus will be travelling along. Minibus operations begin between 0600 and 0700 and they operate through to around 1900, although some minibuses operate later until around 2200. In effect, many minibus operators work only in daylight hours and not at other times. In addition, during the middle of the day when demand reduces, some operators are not in public service.



All city minibus routes and most suburban and distant minibus routes are operated by purpose-built 9 or 12 seater vehicles that have generally been locally modified to increase capacity to 12 or 15 seats respectively. Larger 19 seat minibuses with a central gangway operate services to Linden. Note that there are a total of around 6100 minibuses licensed in Guyana, which indicates that the balance 3,300 units are used either as private and personal [non-public] transport or for business activities. The numbers registered for use another Guyanese cities is unknown but the ratio of local population to registered city minibus is 130 persons against a national average [including privately or freight use minibuses] is 123 persons. As these vehicles have a low ground clearance, it is reasonable to assume that most operate in built up areas rather than on rural roads where the ground clearance would be a severe problem. However, the on street impression is that there are not more private use minibuses on the Georgetown streets than public minibuses. The three city routes operate at very high frequency during peak periods. Operations [together with those from outside the City] are distributed on the streets around the Stabroek Market area in central Georgetown. However, this area is also a major market for traders, is close to the Cross-estuary fast ferries, is shared with building trade wholesalers and is traversed by heavy container lorries passing to and from the port. There are no purpose built passenger waiting areas nor are there orderly loading arrangements. In short, the area and facilities are far from ideal for public transport. Because there is an apparent abundant supply of minibuses, the micro-management of operations to control departures is not undertaken. The high frequency of departures on a route is not itself an indicator of sufficiency, as anecdotal evidence exists that some variant routes are less well served than others and delays occur. In addition, some passengers do discriminate on boarding overloaded minibuses or those that appear to be driven at high speed. As a result, the unpredictability of service frequency and sufficiency of seats available can result in delays that can in turn create hardship for passengers, particularly in hot or wet weather. Evidence is not available concerning the financial and operational dynamics of the market although minibuses have been firmly established for over 15 years as the major public transport provider. The sector appears to generate sufficient income for owners to renew their vehicles periodically and to provide a reasonable living. Indeed, an unquantified number of owners possess more than 1 minibus, although it is stated that few have more than 2 or 3 units. Informal discussions with drivers and passengers suggest that drivers and conductors usually meet the minibus owners agreed daily income targets but, after the payment by the crew of fuel, minor repair costs and for any traffic infringements, their income potential is quite fragile. This low-income base for drivers contributes to their need to maximise revenues through gathering as many passengers as possible and completing as many trips as possible. In turn, this can contribute to the unsafe driving practices of some minibus drivers and to the high incidence of minibuses involved in road traffic accidents.



Clearly, profitability is the key concern of vehicle owners and operators and daily profits by the contracted drivers and conductors, rather than the provision of satisfactory service levels [which are the main concern of passengers]. 3 The Strategic Issues

This section focuses on the key issues that strongly influence the success of the sector in meeting the travel demand needs of the residents and visitors to the city. In addition, there are a variety of actions that can be taken to enhance the tactical and operational aspects of public transport in Georgetown – these are described later in section 4. The identified key and strategic issues are: 3.1 Transport Sector Regulation

Currently there are regulations governing the conduct of drivers and conductors, the construction and use of vehicles and the behaviour of road users. In addition, the GP-TD issues the operators licence that specifies the route to be followed. However, this minimal regulation is concentrated upon the adherence to the general driver, motor vehicle and highway laws plus adherence to the terms of operating only on the authorised route. Therefore a significant responsibility for monitoring adherence with these practical regulations currently rests with the GP-TD. However, the planning, operational control and the sufficiency of the sector itself is largely unregulated. Whilst the concept of limited intervention in the regulation of the sector has enabled a government to allow operators to operate without hindrance, it has resulted in some distortion of the market, with a quite limited route network, some unsafe vehicle, operating and driving practices and no involvement of the passengers as major stakeholders. Tariff regulation is also unclear. 3.2 Institutional Arrangements

In Georgetown, the minibus sector has not been considered as a whole and has been addressed piecemeal by different institutions each with their own social and economic objectives and each seeking solutions that reflect their own objectives. In turn, there has been little appreciation upon what the overall public transport needs are and how best they can be achieved.



3.3 Travel Demand and Public Transport Planning

The planning of the Network of Routes is largely untouched. The GP-TD approves the routes selected by the applicant operators but these are currently confined to 3 routes, –which with some internal variances – cover much of the city.

The measurement and collation of Travel Demand upon either a routine or even occasional basis and the use of such data to plan the optimal arrangement of routes was not seen. As a result, the arrangements for the planning of the frequency of service were not seen.

However, the earlier NDLea Study for the Southern Approach Roads showed from the cordon counts that that the minibuses on all routes were generally providing a frequent and reliable service to most parts of the Georgetown area during most parts of the day when people wanted to travel.

Type of Trip Total Vehicle-

trips

Minibus (MB) Vehicle-trips

% of MB in total vehicle-

trips

Minibus (MB)

Passenger-trips

Estimated Total

Person-trips

% of MB passengers of total person-

trips Inbound to Georgetown

52,880 11,286 21.3% 82,414 162,275 51%

Outbound from Georgetown

47,605 10,096 21.2% 61,459 135,727 45%

3.4 Parking Management

National strategies and local plans for private and public parking schemes, both on street and off-street, and also paid and unpaid have not been seen. It is important that there are agreed policies for the design, implementation, and maintenance of parking schemes.



4 Enhancement of Transport Delivery

4.1 Operation and Control Issues

4.1.1 Accessibility to Services

Minibuses operate only on the three authorised urban routes and their several variants, all of which provide access to downtown Georgetown but none of which contribute to providing useful access across the city to distant suburbs or facilities. 4.1.2 Public Transport Priorities

There are no priorities for public transport, either by way of exclusive use of priority lanes to advance at traffic junctions or for priority at junctions. 4.1.3 Driver Behaviour

Many minibuses travel fast whenever they can and drivers have the reputation for being aggressive, partially because the more trips they complete the more opportunities they have to increase revenues from further trips. Driving aggressively is obviously not universal, but drivers of public transport should show high levels of safety and consideration. It was estimated that around 60% were under contract to vehicle owners. 4.1.4 Terminal Facilities

The arrangements at Stabroek Market, the sole downtown minibus terminal, is inadequate for the complexity of operations in place, the volume of trips undertaken and the variety of other activities undertaken in the same area. The result is that the lack of order and the lack of segregation of the many activities in the area and the many minibus routes that terminate there result in the standards of safety and security for vehicles, passengers and crews has become unacceptable. It is a valid objective to separate the city based operations from those of the outer suburban services and those serving other distant towns. It is also valid that the city service terminals remain close to the Stabroek market location and that the other services currently in the area are moved to the periphery of this densely used central area. It is important that a balance is achieved in moving theses suburban and distant minibus service terminals – they need to be sufficiently separate from the city services that existing conflicts of passengers and vehicles is eliminated, yet sufficiently close to central area activities that passengers can proceed on foot for a few minutes to reach their personal trip destinations. Therefore, terminals re-located several kilometres from the central area would create hardship for many current users.



The facilities at the outer terminals of routes and their variants are also minimal, but as the intensity of use at each of these individual outer terminals is much less than at Stabroek Market, the level of discomfort is relatively less. 4.1.5 Passenger Waiting Facilities

These are not available either at Stabroek Market or at other terminals or at intermediate places. Passengers wait at or near junctions or wherever convenient and hail minibuses as they pass. Similarly, passengers on board negotiate with the driver on where to be set down. The result is that minibuses tend to stop anywhere along the route, sometimes regardless of the safety of themselves or of other road users. In addition, sometimes minibuses will deviate off route to drop a passenger closer to his personal destination, causing delay to others on board. As there are no specified stops, there are no facilities such as waiting shelters or travel information available. However, the ability to stop along the route is also seen as a convenience when passengers are near to their point of origination or destination. The observance of stops at safe places in suburban areas would be improved where waiting shelters and highway markings were in place. The City wanted support from the private sector in funding such facilities. 4.1.6 Driver and Conductor Training and Education

At present drivers require no formal education or training beyond the possession of a valid driving licence. Conductors require no skills or qualifications at all. Training in the qualities ands skills expected to work on public transport vehicles is absent at present, both for drivers and for conductors. In addition, short periods of annual refresher training are conventional for public transport drivers. There was high-level support for improvements in safe working and operating practices. It is suggested to introduce a mandatory short course for drivers and conductors as a requirement of licence renewal. Course to cover road safety, professionalism among drivers, benefits of regular maintenance and the need for good customer relations. Course design could be developed by PTU in liaison with other actors, but can be contracted out to specialist training organisations to implement. Participation in courses to be certified and mandatory for driver and conductor licence renewals. May require minor changes to existing Driver and Conductor Trade Licence conditions. 4.1.7 Recording of Driving Offences

It is conventional that standards set for drivers of public transport are higher than those of other drivers, with options to ban such drivers from public transport driving where appropriate. Without other comment, the national system of driving licences does not incorporate on the licence the records of fines and other penalties when drivers have been convicted of a traffic offence.



4.1.8 Control and Monitoring of Activities

At present there is no formal co-ordination or contrail of routine activities, so that gaps in service or short-term route diversions become a matter of ad-hoc and informal communication among drivers. In addition, lack of information can result in delays in service occurring and no remedial action occurring. 4.1.9 Qualifications for Drivers and Conductors

To specify minimum and maximum ages for minibus drivers and conductors and for minimum educational qualifications. GP-TD to monitor enforcement. May require minor changes to existing Driver and Conductor Trade Licence conditions but will require changes to existing Driving Licence issue conditions. 4.2 Technical Issues

4.2.1 Vehicle Importation Arrangements

Some imports were of cargo-based vans that were then locally converted to passenger use, allowing the maximisation of passenger seats. This then exceeds the manufacturers design capacity and is inherently unsafe for passengers, crew and other road users. The seats were considered insufficiently secured in cases of accidents and were more difficult to access and egress at all times. 4.2.2 Comfort on Board

Minibuses have quite limited space and seating can be cramped, especially for the elderly, the infirm and those with luggage or children. Ease of access and egress through the side door can also be a challenge to these groups, especially when the bus is full. 4.2.3 Vehicle Cleanliness

Dirty interiors and worn or torn seats each appear exacerbated in a small minibus. It is stated that on occasions, the seats and surrounds are dirty or torn and this causes damage or soiling of clothes. There is no redress for this situation. 4.2.4 Use of Second-hand Tyres and Spare Parts

The use of second-hand and non-compliant parts and materials, especially tyres, has been reported. It is stated that cheaper second-hand tyres are important to operational viability, although they are already part worn and lead to premature in-service failures.



4.2.5 Vehicle Reliability and Service Recovery

In service breakdowns do occur occasionally, but there are no formalised arrangements to transfer disrupted passengers to other passing minibuses. Whilst there is a generalised requirement to maintain vehicles, there is no mandatory record available to certify that routine maintenance and safety checks have been competed by a competent mechanic. 4.2.6 Vehicle Sizes

The migration top larger size buses would help enhance safety, although fiscal incentives to manage the transitions may be needed, as owners felt that service intervals would lengthen. They preferred to migrate to the Busetta models used in Columbia and Bolivia that were an intermediate size between current minibuses and the Toyota Coaster type minibuses used in the Linden route. 4.2.7 Artisan Training and Education

At present mechanics and artisans required no formal education or training. Training in the skills needed to repair and maintain vehicles is deficient, especially in the increasingly necessary area of computerised componentaries. The sector would benefit from better training programmes. There was high level support for improvements in safe working and operating practices 4.3 Financial Issues

4.3.1 Tariff Setting

At present there was no clear mechanism to manage the tariff change process. The Ministry of Tourism, Trade and industry considered petitions to make changes but had no legal powers to amend or reject proposals. It was recognised that the current arrangements were unsatisfactory and that a standard and verifiable basis was needed to manage change. 4.3.2 Financial Viability

The dynamics that govern the economics of owning and operating a minibus and the typical use made of vehicles and crew are not well documented. To reorganise the sector requires prior knowledge of the underlying financial dynamics, so that likely consequences of changes to the regulation of the sector can be considered.



4.3.3 Sector Taxation

Payment of valid income tax by persons in the informal minibus sector is not established and initiatives to bring such persons into the tax-assessment process are a valid revenue gathering activity. 4.4 Stakeholder Involvement

4.4.1 Passenger Representation

At present the passenger has almost no influence upon where minibuses are operated, when they operate or even how they operate or the fares charged and, apart from the choice of walking or using private transport, he or she has no option but to accept what is offered. It was stated that passengers felt unable to influence change in the sector. The key issues of passengers were stated to be: • Not all appreciated loud music being played – sometimes wait for subsequent and quieter

minibus. Some considered deafening loud music unhealthy. • Mixing with various types of passengers sometimes unwelcome • Dirty seats soiled clothes • No redress for grievances • Some people consumed food and drink on board and then discarded packaging either within

the bus or, even worse, by throwing them out of the window. • Internal ventilation was inadequate so buses became very stuffy – sliding windows were

insufficient when buses were overcrowded • All bus trips end at Staebroek Market, although some personal journeys may be intra-

suburban 4.4.2 Passenger Complaints Procedures

Passengers can raise concerns and complaints with drivers or conductors but this is not always satisfactory. There is no established mechanism to enable aggrieved passengers to raise their complaints formally, other than through the Guyana Police. 4.4.3 Severely Disabled Travellers

There are no special opportunities for lame, handicapped or disabled persons to use minibuses as at present, their design and style prevents their use by such groups.



4.4.4 Bus Operators Associations

There were Minibus Operator Associations representing owners and workers in the sector. They were a valid information resource on industry practices and, although not necessarily wholly representative of all aspects of the sector, they possessed many views on improving sector performance. A key component of the development of the sector is that engagement with the various Associations is actively supported, so that good and continuous communication is established between those in government responsible for the sector and those working in the sector. 4.4.5 Travel and Transport Information

To devise channels to disseminate information on minibus routes, frequencies, fares and conditions of travel. PTU as regulator to consider print and broadcast media and internet as well as at-site information at main points to broaden knowledge of [public transport facilities available so as to encourage public transport use and to explain how trips can be planned and how remedies for poor service can be processed. In addition, it enables information on fares and conditions of travel to be publicised. 4.5 Existing Laws and Regulations

4.5.1 Enforcement of Existing Traffic Rules and Regulations

The existing legislation and local regulations governing general transport and traffic activities may require more vigorous implementation to see that higher standards of adherence are achieved, but radical changes to the relevant legislation is not generally foreseen. 4.5.2 Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations

The vehicle construction and use standards may need to be more vigorously enforced so that minibuses are not modified or overloaded with passengers, so that the stability, braking, steering and tyre-weight capacities do not exceed the manufacturers original design capacities. Excessive modification, coupled with high speed driving can result in drivers being unable to control vehicles properly, especially in emergency situations. Therefore, a campaign to restore vehicles to original design and equipment is important. This can be undertaken at the time of original importation-registration and also during the twice-yearly inspections. This is a short term measure, as all vehicles should be seen within six months and thus approvals can be withheld until any needed restorations can be achieved. It is proposed that the Guyana Police Traffic Division undertake this initiative.



4.5.3 Minibus Drivers Licences

The qualifications and standards for the issue of licences would benefit from a review. The minimum age for minibus drivers is 21 years, but it would be sensible to move towards standards that embodied: • A minimum period of possession of a private car driving licence [you could be 21 years of

age and have only possessed a licence for 3 weeks, for example]

• Permanent or substantial period of licence cancellation for either a major blameworthy accident or a series of lesser accidents

• Mandatory participation in an annual short minibus driver re-fresher training course

• Maximum driving hours [typical rules would be for no more than 10 hours in any 16 hours per day with no more than 5.5 hours in any one continuous period and at least 8 hours rest between days

• Annual medical examinations for public service drivers aged over 60 years Not all these objectives may be achievable initially. 4.6 Road Safety Issues

High incidence of minibuses in fatal and non-fatal accidents has been well documented. The technical responsibility for Road Safety is held by the MoPWC although the allied strategies to possess common signage and good technical solutions, to educate and inform the public and road users on road safety matters and the monitoring of adherence to traffic laws lies mainly with other road safety stakeholders. This is not typical of good practice because the various separate but good efforts are, in aggregate, less effective than a co-ordinated and concentrated strategy agreed by all stakeholders. To achieve a powerful and combined approach, it is proposed that the National Road Safety Council [understood to be a moribund body at present] be re-invigorated so that all concerned stakeholders [not just the public transport sector] can participate in building a modern road safety policy and take ownership for its implementation. Education and promotion of road safety are relatively low-cost high-value components are should be actively encouraged to improve road user awareness of safety issues and contribute to improving safer driving practices. The technical and engineering aspects help in highway design and highway environment improvements but are sometimes more costly and take longer to implement.



5 Regulatory Reform Proposals

The gradual but now complete abandonment of large bus public transport to the informal self-regulation of the minibus operators has had both positive and negative consequences. On the positive side, it has required very little public funding, other than rudimentary signs and markings at Stabroek Market and fares remain generally low when compared with other commonly consumed everyday essentials. Private sector funds have been used to purchase and maintain the minibuses and no subsidies have been sought to operate. Indeed, with limited finances and limited access to skilled specialists, Government has seen some befits from this light regulation of the sector. However, on the negative side, the minibuses are often heavily loaded and beyond designed capacity, at peak periods terminals are over-crowded and at other times they are full of idle vehicles waiting for passengers, stopping on the routes can be hazardous, drivers tend to speed to run quicker and make more trips and the general ambience of minibus travel has deteriorated over the years. Drivers can work without break for many hours, act aggressively towards passengers, and generally behave without being taken to account. Services are centered on Stabroek Market so intra-suburban journeys often require the use of two routes and the payment of two sets of fares plus additional waiting time at the interchange. The need to regain the initiative, to restore acceptable standards of service delivery and service availability is important. This cannot be achieved without the restoration of some regulation into the sector and the key issue is to achieve this whilst retaining the over-arching befits of private enterprise and reasonable freedom for operators to undertake their daily activities. The case exists to include some forms of regulation into the local minibus market; son the challenge is to identify the extent of regulation needed and the model of regulation appropriate to improve the public transport services for the Georgetown public. In Georgetown, there is a relatively free entry into the minibus sector. This has had the benefit of generating only minimal government intervention and scant operational management coupled with maximum commercial flexibility to the operators. However, it leaves passengers with no travel alternatives and also has resulted in excessive and aggressive behaviour on the road as drivers seek to maximise their revenues in order to pay the daily vehicle hire and to make a living for themselves. Before proceeding to propose arrangements for Georgetown, it is important to understand the basic concepts of regulation in urban transport The key and quite separate components of urban transport regulation are: • Policy Making – government policies concerning nature of the regulatory regimes, the

institutions to undertake regulation and provisions, if any, for social assistance.

• Regulatory Management – the development, monitoring and enforcement of the rules that govern and influence the behaviour of operators and protect the interests of the users of the



systems. Regulators must be independent from the operators. Tariff regulation should be independent of other government institutions.

• Asset Ownership – so that transport operators are transparently separate from the regulators at all times

• Operations –where the management of day-to-day services delivery takes place. The main objectives of the Regulator are to regulate activities in order to manage the quality of minibuses so that overloading, unreliability, use of elderly, poorly maintained unreliable or damaged vehicles is routinely monitored, and action taken and the services provided are quickly improved and much safer for the passengers. This is achieved by the active daily monitoring of activities and with the legal authority to take quick action to remove errant operators from the system. In addition, the Regulator manages the protection of minibus passengers, so that unsafe or inappropriate behaviour by drivers and conductors is investigated and, when needed, action taken to fine or otherwise sanction defaulting crew members. Finally, the Regulator plans systematically, the networks of routes that meet the identified needs of the travelling public in an optimal manner, so that interchange between routes is minimised and costs of personal journeys reduced. The ways in which regulation is undertaken are described below. A key issue is to identify the option that best meets the needs of local conditions and aspirations in Georgetown. 5.1 What can be regulated?

Most regulatory regimes are designed to regulate the quality of services provided, so that vehicles are operated to certain agreed standards of safety and comfort and that they are reliably maintained and repaired and kept in a roadworthy condition. In addition, it is also typical that drivers are sufficiently qualified and drive only within agreed maximum hours of work and observe all the highway safety rules and regulations. In addition, it is also typical that the charges and ranges of fares to be charged are regulated, so that the viability of operations for both owners and operators are considered together with affordability of the fares for passengers and also the long-term viability of the sector.

The extent to which the quantity of services are provided are regulated is more complex, with a range of solutions from the close management of the design of the network of routes, the frequencies of individual services and the times of service provision and the quantity of vehicles authorised to be deployed, through to the free market approach with little or no management of the delivery of routine operations.

Finally, the provision of public transport infrastructures [such as terminals and passenger waiting stops] and public transport information may be regulated.



5.2 What are the ways regulations can be enforced?

There are several types of regulation commonly used in urban transport. These can be summarised as: Figure 5-1: Proposed Organisation of Urban Public Transport for Georgetown

5.2.1 Open Market and Self Regulation

This enables the free entry of operators into the sector, may encourage strong competition but also enables monopolistic associations to form that may become too powerful to generate high standards of service delivery. 5.2.2 Route Permits

Which is in effect the current system in Georgetown, although currently there is no limit to the quantity of vehicles on a route and some routes have many route plan variants. A variant of this system is Route Bundling– where the service area is segmented into several geographic groups of routes, both profitable and unprofitable, with bidders requiring providing services as specified for all of the routes within the bundle.



5.2.3 Franchising

This typically grants a private operator the right, normally through a competitive bidding process, to provide the public transport services for a fixed period, [typically 3 to 5 years] and the successful bidder is then contracted to deliver services to a pre-specified quality standard and at the offered premium [operator pays the regulator a premium] or subsidy [operator receives a subsidy] for service provision. 5.2.4 Services Contracting

This provides for specific routes or groups of routes to be competitively tendered, with the winning bidder being granted the right to operate the services concerned for a fixed term, typically with minibuses, three to five years. The evaluation criteria will include level of services to be offered [frequency-capacity-regularity-operating hours], quality of service [capacity, specification, age and condition of vehicles proposed], environmental emission standards. The fares to be charged may be set by the regulator or proposed by the bidder, dependant on whether a gross cost or net cost contracting regime is proposed. [A gross cost regime is where the regulator receives all revenues and pays the operator to operate the services at an agreed rate of service production, whereas the net cost regime is where operators bid upon the basis of receiving all revenues and absorbs costs, sometimes against a premium payment, sometimes neutral and sometimes with a regulatory subsidy]. This can be arranged with Route Associations – where a finite quantity of operators and vehicles group into an Association bid for the work and the winning group then contracts to supervise and control the routine activities on the route, internally disciplines its participant members and shares the route activities in an equitable manner among the membership. 5.2.5 Management Contracting

Where the regulatory authority owns the system and hires a management company to manage it within specified parameters. 5.3 Specific Recommendation

That a short feasibility study be commissioned to plan the practical steps in implementing a regime for the City to manage its public transport through a series of well specified and competitively bid and openly evaluated against stated criteria for service delivery contracts with pre-qualified route Associations. A matrix on the next page depicts the principle dispersion of responsibilities.



6 Institutional Reform Proposals

The current distribution of responsibilities for managing the supply and control of public transport in Georgetown is fragmented. so that any changes in the ways in which public transport is organised will better meet the demands of users and also be managed in an orderly manner. It is conventional that responsibilities are separated between national responsibilities for the setting of standards and the monitoring of approved local activities and the detail implementation of approved local schemes within such standards. It is important that a balance is achieved so that national bodies retain sufficient authority through the setting of standards to ensure that local decisions can be compliant and consistent, yet provide sufficient flexibility for local decisions to reflect local needs satisfactorily. The government is responsible for defining, within the urban structure, the broad public transport goals for Georgetown. The goals should include general strategies for levels of supply so that the implementing agency understands what it is expected to achieve, empowers it with both the resources to implement the strategies and also the authority to co-ordinate and plan equally with other concerned stakeholders. However, urban public transport can be very emotive and therefore it is important that there are local mechanisms and structures in place. Local public transport decisions are best when they are based on valid data concerning local travel needs and using systems that are flexible and can be adjusted to perceived changes in demand. Therefore, the responsibility for the management and development of Public transport is better held by the City Council than by a national Ministry that would have a wider remit and competing pressures from national issues and solutions. To meet these objectives, it is proposed that Georgetown City Council inaugurate a Public Transport Unit which would be responsible within Georgetown for: • Overall regulation of the sector in Georgetown

• Formation of annual travel demand programmes and survey plans

• The planning and management of specific travel demand surveys

• Specification of standards for public transport service delivery

• Specification of processes for local consultation on transport activities

• Participation in designing any public transport funding strategies

• Designing and implementing sector activity reporting systems

• Participation in Road Safety forums

• Monitoring of public transport activities

• Contributing to the development of transport infrastructure projects



• Liaison with transport operators, transport users and user groups

• Management of any approved funding support for public transport activities

• Defining and then planning the network of routes

• Assessing minimum frequency of service standards

• Defining hours of availability services

• Developing strategies to migrate gradually to optimal size buses to meet most local travel demand requirements

In addition, to address the parking management needs and strategies to address car parking which is a chronic problem throughout the working day in Georgetown. Good parking control and management is closely connected to making public transport more attractive so it is also important that this issue is resourced and managed by the City. To achieve this objective, it is thus also proposed that the City [through the PTU] be responsible for the development and promotion of parking management strategies in Georgetown. Detail actions are described under section 8.1. However, note also that the regulation of fares is an emotive issue and it is proposed that tariff setting be the responsibility of the Public Utilities Commission, which already holds generally similar powers for other utility providers. The object would be to protect the interests of consumers-passengers so that tariffs remain sufficient for operators to remain viable [to cover operating costs, capital costs and a reasonable profit] yet remain affordable and socially acceptable. Note also that the alternative institutional option is to create a new local body solely responsible for public transport issues in Georgetown. This would be a more expensive and not necessarily more effective solution than adding public transport responsibilities to those of the existing municipal authority. It is a matter of scale – Georgetown is a relatively small city in a relatively small conurbation and it does not generate the responsibilities or funding requirements that exist in meeting the mobility and public transport needs of a major metropolitan region. Finally, the upgradation of the importance of public transport in Georgetown requires an analysis of the training needs to improve professionalism in public transport among the concerned institutions. Because the main responsibilities for pubic transport would rest with the City Council, it is proposed that their needs are prioritised. The new unit would need to be staffed and likely key areas where expertise will need to be strengthened and longer-term training needed include: • Transport tendering and contracting procedures

• Travel demand survey techniques, data analysis and programme planning In addition, the MoPWC has a Central Transport Planning Unit that has in-Ministry responsibilities for transport engineering and transport economics. These high level approaches



to transport planning do not address the more pragmatic needs concerning the planning and regulation of effective public transport activities in Georgetown. To redress these issues it is proposed that short-term assistance be provided to train and equip a small group in these specialist skills. The Public Utilities Commission would need to acquire advice and experience on public transport tariff setting strategies and techniques. This may be acquired through training of current tariff specialists or by the recruitment of an additional staff member or by contracting out as required to an independent specialist. 6.1 Specific Recommendations

6.1.1 Georgetown City Council inaugurates a Public Transport Unit

In accordance with the description above and that it is resourced and staffed appropriately. See the matrix of responsibilities depicted on the previous page. 6.1.2 Georgetown City Council be responsible for the development and promotion of

parking management strategies

In accordance with the description above and that it is resourced and staffed appropriately. 6.1.3 The Public Utilities Commission be responsible or tariff setting

In accordance wit the texts and with the comments in section 4.3.1. 6.1.4 Profession Training in Public Transport Activities

That the proposed PTU and the MoPWC each receive short term technical support for staff with direct responsibilities for public transport sector activities.



7 Proposals for Travel Demand Management

7.1 Strategic Transport Planning

Guyana is a small developing country with transport characteristics that are generally reflective of this in the scale of activities and issues arising. This also applies to Georgetown. As a result, it requires practical and simple solutions. Specific national strategies for urban and public transport and for traffic management were not seen. Private car ownership is low by international standards yet traffic congestion in Georgetown already creates conflicts regularly during peak periods every working day. The gradual growth of car ownership will incrementally and adversely affect this congestion so it is timely to recognise that the setting of standards and their implementation in guiding urban structural planning and strategic transport planning is important if orderly absorption of growth is to be achieved. It is proposed that the Central Transport Planning Unit at the Ministry of Public Works and Communications be tasked with forming such strategies within a specific medium term timeframe; say two years, after consultation and liaison with valid stakeholders. 7.2 Travel Demand Management in Georgetown

Georgetown City Council best undertakes this locally, and the responsibilities are summarised in the preceding section concerning the institutional arrangements for public transport. It is proposed that the PTU undertakes the task of organising and managing the travel demand processes in order to optimise the development of the public transport route networks. 7.3 Specification of National Signage Standards

The consistent standardisation, specification, funding and installation and maintenance of traffic signs, road markings and traffic control devices is important for achieving good standards of road safety. Road users need to be able to quickly recognise signs and other highway directions, wherever they are in Guyana without confusion or variation. It is understood that the MoPWC, the Police and Georgetown City Council each have responsibilities in these areas. It is proposed that the common specification and application criteria for such signs, markings and devices be reviewed and developed with all stakeholders participating and the agreed the final product implemented for all subsequent renewals and new developments. It is proposed that the MoPWC undertakes the task in consultation with the valid stakeholders. It is also proposed that the



implementation agency will retain their responsibilities but utilise the common approved specifications. 7.4 Specific Recommendations

7.4.1 The PTU be responsible for public transport travel demand management

It will undertake the task of organising and managing the travel demand processes in order to optimise the development of the public transport route networks. 7.4.2 The MoPWC reviews the specification of national signage standards

In liaison with other stakeholders.



8 Local Traffic Management and Parking Activities

8.1 Parking Management

To improve parking conditions in Georgetown, it is important that an inventory of parking availability, especially in central Georgetown, is established, both for on street and off-street parking, for privately owned and publicly owned parking spaces and for paid and unpaid parking arrangements. In addition, an assessment of parking needs so that a quantification of parking demand can be made, both by location of parking demand and by the time of parking demand. The comparison between the inventory of available spaces and the demand for spaces will provide a clearer understanding of parking conditions and help form new and better strategies to manage parking. In most cities, the solution has been to introduce off-street paid parking for meet most demand and to have limited on-street short-term parking at premium charges to meet short term parking needs [typically for maximum stays of under 60 minutes]. The system would generate funds to provide for enforcement staff. As mentioned, the City Council PTU would be responsible for developing this activity. 8.2 Approved Heavy Vehicle Routes

Approved routes and parking arrangements for heavy freight vehicles are important in urban areas. Heavy vehicles justify special consideration because of their weight and the effect on road surfaces, their size and their effect on access and congestion and also their impact on local traffic speeds, plus the safety issues surrounding the movement of large or flammable or noxious loads in urban areas. This topic does not necessarily directly conflict with public transport except where the incidence of heavy vehicles is such that it influences the ability of public transport operations to run smoothly and safely. Finally, these heavy vehicles are best parked off highway to enhance security and safety, so the designation of specific off-street parking areas for such vehicles is desirable. 8.3 Markings, Signage and Control Devices

Proposals concerning the common specification and application criteria for signs, markings, and devices were addressed in section 7. It was proposed that the various agencies responsible for implementation and maintenance of markings, signs, and control devices would each retain their own responsibilities but utilise the common approved specifications.



8.4 Highway Hierarchies

The MOPWC is responsible for some major arteries through Georgetown with other public roads being in the responsibility of the City Council. The availability of funds and priorities are naturally different within the two organisations so outcomes in maintenance and repair may be different. Opportunities to co-ordinate efforts would be helpful. 9 Action Plans

Attached are a series of Action Plans that summarise the actions recommended from the texts. They are separated by the Strategic Issues and then the secondary issues in thematic groups. In addition, they indicate the identified responsible organisation and the broad timescale from approval to completion of the objective are expected. An indicate timeframe for anticipated implementations is shown. Short-term activities are anticipated to be completed within 6 to 9 months of approval, whilst medium term actions are expected to be implemented within 9 to 24 months of approval whilst long-term actions are expected to be implemented with 24 to 48 months of approval. Figure 9-1: Indicative Timeframes for Implementation

ST MT LT Assistance Training Tools

5.1 Planning of Network of Routesto establish a Public Transport Unit [PTU] to be

responsible for urban public transport activities in Georgetown.

Georgetown City Council

5.2 Measurement of Travel Demandto be a responsibility of the PTU. Undertake

simple cost-effective sampling. Consider use of newspaper distributed self-completion forms

PTU - Georgetown City Council

5.3 Regulation of Public Transport to be the primary responsibility of the PTU. PTU - Georgetown City Council

5.4 Frequency of Service Planning Arising from demand surveys, to specify where additional service is required, if any. PTU - Georgetown City Council no action needed where supply normally meets or

exceeds identified demand

5.5 Availability of Service Arising from demand surveys, to specify when additional service is required, if any. PTU - Georgetown City Council

this is likely to be relevant during mid to late evening where residual demand may exist that

remain viable for minibus operation.

5.6 Access to Public Transportto be the responsibility of the PTU. Arising from

demand surveys, to specify when new route options as needed


setting of criteria for priorities Ministry of Public Works & Communications [MoPWC]

detail design and implementation of specific priorities PTU - Georgetown City Council

maintenance of Infrastructures

5.8 Driver Behaviour speeding drivers - vigorous application of existing laws related to drivers and driving Guyana Police- Traffic Division [GP-TD] vigorous application of existing laws related to

drivers and driving

dispersal of longer distance minibuses from Stabroek Market to new nearby terminals

PTU - Georgetown City Council and Guyana Police Traffic Division

requires co-ordinated effort. PTU to develop sites and then GP-TD to supervise physical transfer to new sites. Requires joint publicity and also long-term liaison with operator associations and user

groups

development of orderly segregation of residual city minibus routes at Stabroek Market site


requires co-ordinated effort. PTU to re-develop sites and then GP-TD to supervise the changed arrangements. Requires joint publicity and also long-term liaison with operator associations and

user groups

up-grades to the minibus outer terminals within Georgetown


requires co-ordinated effort. PTU to up-grade waiting facilities sites. Requires joint publicity and also long-term liaison with operator associations

and local residents.

5.10 Passenger Waiting Facilities

Specification of stopping place criteria and minimum standards and essential and optional

facilities. identification of safe stopping places at high-use stopping points along the route and

development and marking of specific stop places, with waiting facilities where space is available.

Ministry of Public Works & Communications [MoPWC], PTU - Georgetown City Council and

Guyana Police Traffic Division

MoPWC to specify designs and standards. PTU and GP=TD approve sites in liaison with operator

associations and local residents. Funding and maintenance from Georgetown Municipal Council.

Action Plan Summary

5.7 Public Transport Priorities

PriorityRef Issue Proposal Responsible Actors Technical Support

5.9 Minibus Terminals

Comments


Action Plan Summary

PriorityRef Issue Proposal Responsible Actors Technical SupportComments

5.11 Passenger Complaints Proceduresto specify in the Operators Licences that the

procedures for passengers raising complaints be posted within the vehicles


standard information posters to be provided to the Operators at Li-

cence Renewal. PTU to establish mechanism for dealing with com-

plaints and specified sanctions for contravention of rules and licence conditions. May require minor

changes to existing Licence conditions.

5.12 Comfort on Board Minibusesto specify in the Operators Licences that the limits

upon the carriage of goods on or within the vehicles


standard information posters to be provided to the Operators at Licence Renewal. PTU to establish

mechanism for dealing with complaints and specified sanctions for contravention of rules and licence conditions. May require minor changes to

existing Licence conditions..

5.13 Vehicle Cleanliness drivers responsible for vehicle cleanliness and for action on soiled seats and interiors


standard information posters to be provided to the Operators at Licence Renewal. GP-TD to enforce

regulations where needed. PTU to establish mechanism for dealing with complaints and speci-

fied sanctions for contravention of rules and licence conditions. May require minor changes to

existing Licence conditions..

modification to vehicle design absolutely prohibited without prior written Police approval - Guyana Police- Traffic Division [GP-TD]

vigorous application of existing laws related to unauthorised modification to the design and use of

vehicles. Specific checks to be made at times of vehicle inspections and at random roadside

checks. May require minor changes to existing Certificate of Fitness conditions.

use of second-hand or sub-standard tyres and brake or steering componentaries to be prohibited Guyana Police- Traffic Division [GP-TD]

Specific checks to be made at times of vehicle inspections and at random roadside checks. May

require minor changes to existing Certificate of Fitness conditions.

5.15 Carriage of Severely Disabled Passengersto review mobility needs of the severely lame and

disabled outside of the conventional public transport network

Ministry of Health

unlikely to be viable to modify pu-blic transport fleets or patterns of services to

accommodate special needs. Requires separate solution

5.16 Vehicle Reliability and Service Recovery

passengers to obtain on the spot refunds from the conductor of fares paid or prompt transfer to

following services where trips cannot be completed arising from vehicle breakdowns or

accidents in service.

Guyana Police- Traffic Division [GP-TD]

standard information posters to be provided to the Operators at Licence Renewal. GP-TD to enforce

regulations where needed. PTU to establish mechanism for dealing with complaints and

specified sanctions for contravention of rules and licence conditions. May require minor changes to

existing Licence conditions.

owners to maintain standardised records of routine maintenances and repairs by qualified mech-

anics to certify roadworthiness.Guyana Police- Traffic Division [GP-TD]

GP-TD to enforce regulations where needed. May require minor changes to existing Certificate of

Fitness conditions.

5.14 Modifications to Vehicle Design and Use


Action Plan Summary

PriorityRef Issue Proposal Responsible Actors Technical SupportComments

to introduce a mandatory short course for drivers and conductors as a requirement of licence

renewal. Course to cover road safety, professionalism among drivers, benefits of regular

maintenance and the need for good customer relations


Course design developed by PTU in liaison with other actors, but can be contracted out to

specialist train-ing organisations to implement. Participation in courses to be certified and mandatory for driver and conductor licence renewals. May require

minor changes to existing Driver and Conductor Trade Licence conditions.

specification of minimum and maximum ages for minibus drivers and conductors and for minimum

educational qualifications

Ministry of Home Affairs with Guyana Police- Traffic Division [GP-TD]

In liaison with other actors, to speci-fy educational and age criteria. GP-TD to monitor

enforcement. May require minor changes to existing Driver and Conductor Trade Licence conditions but will require changes to existing

Driving Licence issue conditions.

5,18 Recording of Driving Offences

to devise a national scheme to record on licence the fines and other penalties when drivers have been convicted of a traffic offence. To set higher standards and penalties for public bus drivers.

Ministry of Home Affairs with Guyana Police- Traffic Division [GP-TD]

longer term initiative to encompass all driving classes in Guyana but with special reference to

public service vehicle drivers.

5.19 Control and Monitoring of Activities

to undertake random but specified minimum checks on operations across the minibus network in Georgetown and to comment quarterly upon a

range of pre-specified issues


5.20 Tariff Setting Strategies

in liaison with other actors, MoT,T & I to devise a standard process and criteria for the setting and review of passenger fares and methods for the of

collection and recording of sales

Ministry of Tourism, Trade & Industry with PTU - Georgetown City Council

PTU to manage tariff change application processes in liaison with operator

associations and user groups, with proposals considered by MT, T & I

5,21 Financial Viabilityto identify typical annual revenues, costs and

worker and vehicle utilisation rates to establish Sectoral viability.

Guyana Revenue Authority [GRA] in liaison with PTU - Georgetown City Council

GRA to research typical annual owner, driver and conductor incomes

5.22 Sectoral Taxation

to introduce taxation for workers in the sector though owners payment of quarterly taxation based on standardised income assumptions based on passenger occupation rates - ticket

sales.

Guyana Revenue Authority [GRA]

GRA to research typical annual owner, driver and conductor incomes and then set quarterly tax payments certified by a tax 'disc' displayed on

vehicle similar to vehicle registration disc. Requires wide consultation.

5.23 Transport and Travel Informationto devise channels to disseminate information on minibus routes, frequencies, fares and conditions

of travel.PTU - Georgetown City Council

PTU to consider print and broad-cast media and internet as well as at-site

information at main points

5.17 Driver and Conductor Training and Education



10 Other Recommended Actions

These represent those actions that may require some form of external support in the short term to support the institutions to achieve the anticipated outputs. 10.1 Tools Needs Identified

This relates to the perceived lack of modern tools to enable the various actors to achieve good practice standards. These are two specific areas: Reference 5.4.1. To inaugurate the management of parking arrangements in Georgetown, it will ultimately be necessary to select and install parking meters, parking control barriers and the architecture related to modern parking management systems, In addition, an appropriate computer analysis tool would be needed to plan and manage activities. Reference 7.4.1. To assist inauguration of travel demand disciplines into managing public transport activities may require some computer analysis and data collection tools to maximise staff productivity and efficiency. 10.2 Technical Assistance Proposals

There are several areas where short-term technical assistance would be proposed, either for selected staff to attend courses to upgrade skills or for specialists to provide assistance directly in Georgetown to a wider group of staff. The areas are: References 5.3, 6.1.1, and 6.1.4. To assist in the development of the legal and institutional elements of inaugurating a regulator regime within the PTU of Georgetown City Council and then to undertake training of local staff – it is proposed that a short-term expert undertakes the task in Georgetown. Reference 6.1.2. To assist in the development of the legal and institutional elements of inaugurating a modern parking management system within the PTU of Georgetown City Council – it is proposed that a short term expert undertakes the task in Georgetown Reference 6.1.3 and 4.3.1. To assist the Public Utilities Commission to manage a tariff change assessment process, it is recommended that a short-tern expert undertake the task in Georgetown Reference 7.4.1. To assist in the development of survey systems, techniques and analysis of demand and then to plan route networks and specifications for transport supply tenders – it is



proposed that a short-term expert undertakes the task in Georgetown and, in addition, trains staff in implementing the techniques developed. Reference 7.4.2. To assist in review of national signage standards and the inauguration of an approved system, It is proposed that short-term assistance be provided, either inn Georgetown or overseas. References 4.1.6, 4.1.9 and 4.2.7. To assist in developing suitable curricula and materials to enhance training of drivers, conductors and mechanics and artisans, – it is proposed that a short-term expert undertakes the task in Georgetown and then to undertake a first-run of the agreed training programmes. Reference 4.3.2.and 4.3.3 to assist Guyana Revenue Authority to identify transaction values in the sector and then to devise a sound basis for sector worker taxation, it is recommended that a short-tern expert undertake the task in Georgetown. Reference 4.5.3. To assist the Guyana Police and Ministry of Home Affairs to set fresh standards for minibus driver qualifications for driving licences and operator licences, it is recommended that a short secondment of staff to asses best practice regimes be undertaken. Reference 4.6. To assist in the re-inauguration of the National Road Safety Council, it is proposed that, it is recommended that a short-tern expert undertake the task in Georgetown and trains staff concerning the techniques developed to enhance high standards of road safety. 10.3 Training Needs Identified

There are several areas where the training is allied to the Technical Assistance programmes which include some elements of training with the assistance proposals. These are: References 5.3, 6.1.1, and 6.1.4. To assist in the development of the legal and institutional elements of inaugurating a regulator regime within the PTU of Georgetown City Council and then to undertake training of local staff – it is proposed that a short-term expert undertakes the task in Georgetown. References 4.1.6, 4.1.9, and 4.2.7. To assist in developing suitable curricula and materials to enhance training of drivers, conductors and mechanics and artisans, – it is proposed that a short-term expert undertakes the task in Georgetown and then to undertake a first-run of the agreed training programmes. Reference 4.6. To assist in the re-inauguration of the National Road Safety Council, it is proposed that, it is recommended that a short-tern expert undertake the task in Georgetown and trains staff concerning the techniques developed to enhance high standards of road safety.



Reference 7.4.1. To assist in the development of survey systems, techniques and analysis of demand and then to plan route networks and specifications for transport supply tenders – it is proposed that a short-term expert undertakes the task in Georgetown and, in addition, trains staff in implementing the techniques developed.


Annex 1: Current and Proposed Institutional Arrangements



Annex 2: Current and Proposed Regulatory Arrangements


Annex 3: Proposed Structure – Public Transport Unit


Annex 4: Public Transport – Roles and Responsibilities



Working Paper 22: Urban Transport Development [Special Study No. 1 (ToR)] Contents

1 Georgetown Urban Planning ................................................................................................. 1

2 Greater Georgetown Development Plan 2001 - 2010........................................................... 2

3 Road Maintenance in Georgetown ........................................................................................ 3 3.1 General.............................................................................................................................. 3 3.2 Georgetown Streets under Responsibility of MPW&C .................................................... 3

4 Traffic Management in Georgetown ..................................................................................... 5

5 Ogle Airport in Georgetown .................................................................................................. 5 5.1 General.............................................................................................................................. 5 5.2 Access to Ogle Airport ..................................................................................................... 6

6 Georgetown Harbour.............................................................................................................. 7 Annexes

Annex 1: Vehicle Registration (1999 – 2004)........................................................................... 8

Annex 2: Terms of Reference – Urban Transport Development............................................. 10

Contents – Annex 2

1 Background ........................................................................................................................... 10 1.1 Road Network ................................................................................................................. 10 1.2 Demerara Harbour Bridge .............................................................................................. 10 1.3 Georgetown Harbour ...................................................................................................... 11 1.4 Ogle and Timehri Airports.............................................................................................. 12 1.5 Public Transport.............................................................................................................. 12 1.6 Institutional Organization ............................................................................................... 13

2 Study Objectives.................................................................................................................... 14 2.1 Global Objectives ........................................................................................................... 14 2.2 Policy and Institutional Strengthening............................................................................ 15 2.3 Transport Demand Surveys............................................................................................. 15 2.4 Public Transport.............................................................................................................. 16 2.5 Traffic Management and Road Safety Improvements .................................................... 16

3 Expertise required................................................................................................................. 17


Guyana: Transport Sector Study ii

4 Duration of the Study ........................................................................................................... 18

5 Output .................................................................................................................................... 18 Annex 3: Revised Version by GOPA of Draft ToR submitted by MPW&C / Works Services

Group – Demerara River Crossing .......................................................................... 19


0 Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................ 19

I Background and Consultancy Objective ............................................................................ 19

II Contents of the Study............................................................................................................ 21

PHASE I. Assessment of Current Situation..................................................................... 21 1.1 Background Description ................................................................................................. 21 1.2 Economic Data................................................................................................................ 21 1.3 Current Demerara River Crossing .................................................................................. 22

PHASE II. Data Base Development.................................................................................... 22 2.1 Current Road Traffic....................................................................................................... 22 2.2 Engineering Surveys ....................................................................................................... 22 2.3 Maintenance Standards ................................................................................................... 23 2.4 Vehicle and Bridge Operating Cost Data........................................................................ 23 2.5 Freight Flows and Potential ............................................................................................ 23 2.6 Economic Activity Significantly Tied to Quality of Transportation Facilities............... 23 2.7 Road Traffic Projections ................................................................................................. 24 2.8 Vessel Traffic Projections............................................................................................... 24

PHASE III. Preliminary Engineering.................................................................................. 24 3.1 River Crossing Variants.................................................................................................. 24 3.2 Engineering Design of Variants...................................................................................... 24 3.3 Construction.................................................................................................................... 25 3.4 Project Cost Estimates .................................................................................................... 25

PHASE IV. Environmental and Social Feasibility ............................................................. 25 4.1 Environmental impact..................................................................................................... 25 4.2 Environmental Impact Evaluation .................................................................................. 26

4.2.1 Area of study ...................................................................................................... 26 4.2.2 Environmental evaluation................................................................................... 27 4.2.3 Evaluation of Environmental Liabilities............................................................. 29

4.3 Environmental Management Plan................................................................................... 30 4.4 Final Report on the Environmental Impact Study .......................................................... 31


Guyana: Transport Sector Study iii

PHASE V. Economic and Financial Evaluation of River Crossing Alternatives........... 31 5.1 Economic Evaluation...................................................................................................... 31

5.1.1 User and non-user benefits ................................................................................. 31 5.1.2 Economic costs of each alternative .................................................................... 31 5.1.3 Economic Evaluation of alternatives .................................................................. 31

5.2 Financial Evaluation ....................................................................................................... 32 5.3 Other impacts.................................................................................................................. 32

PHASE VI. Public Consultations Guidelines...................................................................... 32 6.1 Purposes .......................................................................................................................... 32 6.2 Levels of consultation..................................................................................................... 33

6.2.1 General ............................................................................................................... 33 6.2.2 Specific ............................................................................................................... 33

III Characteristics of the Consultancy...................................................................................... 34

IV Expertise Required ............................................................................................................... 34

V REPORTS.............................................................................................................................. 35

Diagrams

Diagram A3- 1: Map Showing Location of Demerara Harbour Bridge .................................. 20

Annex 4: Note on Demerara Harbour Bridge.......................................................................... 37


1 Introduction........................................................................................................................... 37

2 Maintenance .......................................................................................................................... 37

3 Operations ............................................................................................................................. 38

4 Traffic..................................................................................................................................... 38

5 Finance ................................................................................................................................... 39

6 Future Bridge Replacement ................................................................................................. 40


Guyana: Transport Sector Study

Profile of Special Study No. 1 Title Urban Transport Development Objective To Develop ToR(s) for subsequent possible Donor

Support

Interest Shown by: IDB, EU, Steering Committee, WSG, MARAD

Team Specializations incorporated Roads, River Transport, Environmental, Legal, Urban Transport,

Likely Output Detailed ToR(s) that will lead to substantial Follow-up Studies

Main Ministries likely to be Involved / Consulted

MPW&C, WSG, MARAD, CAA, Ogle Airport, CJIAC Georgetown City Council

Main Transport Sub-sector Institutions Involved

Roads, Rivers, Air Transport, Traffic, Urban Transport, Shipping, Administration/Capacity Building, Legal, Environmental

Synopsis

Assistance with strategic development of urban transport plan (Georgetown Traffic and Transport Masterplan. This Study would incorporate many important cross-cutting legal & institutional issues of a strategic nature, would take into consideration recommendations in respect of the future location of a modern container terminal and would take into consideration recommendations in respect of longer term solutions in respect of the DHB crossing.

Notes:

1 The Study will refer to all previous studies, including the Southern Approach Roads Study, the Demerara Harbour Bridge Study, Public Transport Study, etc.

2 This in-depth study should be undertaken in parallel with Special Study No. 2, because the results of SS No.2 would feedback into the SS No. 1.



1 Georgetown Urban Planning

The Central Housing & Planning Authority (CHPA), Ministry of Housing and Water, is studying various schemes for Georgetown, one of which is Stabroek Market Development Scheme. This scheme includes a re-appropriation of the water front with creation of a mall. The Authority is not really involved in infrastructure development studies carried out by MPW&C, although infrastructure planning and urban planning should be closely interrelated. The Authority is concerned about a future duplication of Georgetown southern approach road: north-south Well Street is planned by CHPA to be extended southward, parallel to Demerara East Bank road (road to Timehri airport). There is no plan for a ring road other than existing Sheriff and Mandela Roads. The Authority has plans to relocate minibus terminals: • at Durban/Smyth junction, between Durban and Bent Streets in the South

• at Camp Street jail, which is to be relocated (South as well)

• at Republic/Robb junction (Centre/West of the City)

• along Church Road (North) There had been previous intents to relocate minibus terminals; those intents failed due to the determination of minibus owners to keep making their terminal at Stabroek Market. There is a Central Transport Planning Unit at WSG1 Department, MPW&C, which carries out transport planning studies at national level and has a transport planner and a transport economist in its staff. Georgetown Municipality has few resources; most of taxes (such as licensing of vehicles, including public transport vehicles) go to GoG and the City Council must solicit subsidies from the Government, giving it plans and investment justifications. Paid parking could be a way to enhance Municipality revenues while organizing and managing parking supply on and off the road.

1 Work Services Group (studies department)



2 Greater Georgetown Development Plan 2001 - 2010

“Greater Georgetown Development Plan 2001-2010” was designed for the Ministry of Housing& Water, Central Housing and Planning Authority, by Prof. Akhtar Khan, chartered Town planner, CFTC expert. The Plan is being reviewed at MPW&C; it is not yet approved although it has received good marks. Remarkable features of the Plan are listed hereafter: • A two-lane fixed bridge should be built across Demerara River; • Ogle aerodrome should be developed into a Municipal and Regional Airport of entry (links

with neighbouring countries); • A Local Planning Authority (LPA) should be created for the protection of the environment; • Proposal of a “Linear Park” along Lamaha Canal, to prolong the Botanical Gardens; • Spaces between buildings should be as important as the buildings themselves; • Parking spaces (lots) should be associated with landscaping; • No residential, leisure or work place should remain within 50 m of high voltage overhead

cables; • Sophia neighbourhood should be upgraded for low income housing, with 4873 housing

units to be planned; • Transportation Plan:

– Provide better links with national roads network – Reduce the need to travel by car – Provide efficient travel through public transport, cycling and walking

• Road schemes: – Mandela avenue is to carry the majority of east-west traffic, – Sheriff street is to carry the majority of north-south traffic, – Most junctions need improvement schemes, – A north-south highway should be constructed parallel to East Bank Road, between

Eastern Mandela Avenue and Soesdyke. The role of the Central Housing & Planning Authority is to deal with urban planning, transportation improvement in Georgetown. The City Council is in charge of secondary roads, traffic management, and has an advisory role in maintenance of the public transport system; The Traffic Police is in charge of traffic planning, implementation in conjunction with the City Council. The water frontage should be opened up, receiving high quality development and riverside walk. A green belt should protect the City periphery from excessive urbanization.



3 Road Maintenance in Georgetown

3.1 General

Road maintenance in Georgetown is the responsibility of the City Council, except some of the primary roads, called “public streets” (see list in next section) which are under responsibility of MPW&C. The City Council complains that they lack resources to carry out their duties in terms of road maintenance. Most taxes go to the Government and the City Council depends on subsidies, must solicit those providing justifications. Some maintenance is provided by about 30 people from municipal staff but they seem to have difficulties purchasing necessary material. The Deputy City Engineer is in charge of road maintenance. Two engineers would be interested in receiving training on road maintenance. 3.2 Georgetown Streets under Responsibility of MPW&C

Georgetown streets under responsibility of MPW&C are the following (Source: Works Services Group, MPW&C): • Clive Lloyd Drive • Rupert Craig Highway – Vlissengen Road to Industry Road2 • University of Guyana access road • Ramhit Road • Water Street – Kingston sluice to Sea Wall • Battery Road – Water Street to High Street • Sea Wall Road – High Street to Vlissengen Road • Young Street • Barrack Street – Camp Street to Parade Street • Camp Street – Lamaha Street to Sea Wall • Fort Street – Bridge at Wight’s Lane to Battery Road • Vlissengen Road – Sea Wall to Hadfield Street • J.B. Singh Road3 - Lamaha Street to Carifesta Avenue • Station Street – Vlissengen Road to Railway Embankment • Duncan Street - Vlissengen Road to Sheriff Street • Thomas Road 2 Previously Cummings Lodge 3 Previously Irving Street



• Sheriff Street • Mandela Avenue4 • Houston by-pass Road • East Bank Road – La Penitence High Bridge to Agricola (Eccles Culvert) • Eastern Highway • Ogle aerodrome Road Streets mentioned above are called “Public streets” while other roads, under the responsibility of Georgetown City Council, are called “City streets”. Maintenance of “Public streets” is by MPW&C while maintenance of “City streets” is by the City Council.

4 Previously Kitty Avenue and Ruimveldt Avenue



4 Traffic Management in Georgetown

Traffic management is the responsibility of Traffic Police, in coordination with the City Council. According to official texts, the City Council should retain more control than it does on traffic management, but it lacks the means to do so. The City Council has no traffic management capacity. Some four people working in the City Council would be interested in receiving a training (workshop seminar), jointly with concerned Police and MPW&C staff. There is a municipal police in Georgetown, with a staff of about 200. They are led by the Chief Constable. See in Annexe 2 Terms of Reference for an Urban Transport Study for Georgetown. 5 Ogle Airport in Georgetown

5.1 General

Ogle Airport is located in the north-eastern suburbs of Georgetown, close to the sea shore. It is advantaged by its closeness to Georgetown, unlike CJIAC International Airport, located 40 km south of the city, with uneasy access through mostly urbanised areas, on a two-lane road. Ogle Airport Inc. is a private company that leased Ogle airport from GoG for 25 years (with extension periods of 25 years on request of the lessee). The airport provides domestic services and chartered international services to neighbouring countries. Customs and immigration officers are present at the airport. The airport is poor in fire fighting and other facilities. Traffic at the airport in 2002: 47674 passengers 3974 tons of freight Traffic at the airport in 2003: 55308 passengers 4204 tons of freight During the first six months of 2004, as compared with the same period in 2003, passenger traffic increased by 5.1%. Growth forecast is between 2 and 6%, with a 4% medium hypothesis. Eight (8) companies are operating 34 aircrafts.



The existing runway (07/00) is paved, 561 m long and 8.2 to 9 m wide. It can be used by STOL5 aircrafts of up to 12,500 pounds. A second parallel runway is under construction: 800 x 18 m, built of reinforced concrete slabs, designed for 50,000 pounds aircrafts and 3 to 4000 movements per year. Works should be completed in March 2006. Concrete slabs might be reinforced with an additional layer of concrete, in the future. The E.U. might finance a further extension of the runway to 1200 m, 30 m wide plus 300 m overrun (cost: 1.5 million euros). Navigation equipment of the airport should include ALS in the short term, DME6 and full IFR7 equipment in the future. Opening hours will be 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. An International Terminal will be built north-west of the new runway, on the airport property. It will require an east-west paved road for access from the main north-south access road. 5.2 Access to Ogle Airport

Main (north-south) access to Ogle airport is from East Coast Demerara Road, a wide double carriageway road. OAI management considers that this road should be a double carriageway as far as Buxton, since many users of the airport come from the East, and various markets along the road are the cause of traffic jams. A secondary access to Georgetown is through the prolongation of the Railway Embankment Road. From ECD road, a north-south narrow paved road in bad condition after the flooding of January 2005, serves the airport and the neighbourhood. A narrow east-west paved road about 150 m long links this last road to the airport. The right of way of the north-south access road is important; it will allow a rebuilding of the road with a two-lane 7 m carriageway and 2 x 1.5 m shoulders and might probably allow the future construction of a four-lane road. Drainage is facilitated by culverts flowing into a small parallel canal; more culverts are probably necessary to avoid any flooding of the road, although the platform is super-elevated. There is no access from the south of the airport. OAI management considers that the road could be prolonged southward and widened, to become a major by-pass of the City.

5 Short Take Off and Landing 6 Distance measuring equipment 7 Instrument Flight Rules, allowing flight without visibility



6 Georgetown Harbour

Shipping companies do not consider necessary for Guyana to have a deep water port. Maritime freight transport nowadays is hierarchical, with freight transfers from large to smaller vessels at intermediate hubs such as Port-of-Spain in Trinidad or Kingston in Jamaica, in the case of Guyana. Volumes of freight do not justify the coming of large vessels to Guyana. It will however be necessary, in the medium term, to relocate container facilities (currently spread among several private terminals on the East Bank of the Demerara River) to a new purpose built container port (terminal and berths in conjunction with multipurpose berth for bulk / general freight). One end of the port would be for containers, the other end would be for bulk / multi purpose. Sites for a new container terminal could be on East bank Demerara, West bank Demerara or Berbice River. It should have a good road access, ample room for long term expansion (land areas and berths) and be close to entrance channel with room for manoeuvring vessels. Maintaining a floating bridge on the Demerara River would de facto eliminate container port solutions on West bank Demerara and Berbice River, and also upstream the bridge, leaving few possibilities to accommodate it in the available space on East bank Demerara. The best solution therefore might be the construction of a fixed bridge on Demerara River and a container port built on the west bank of the river, with plenty of space and the proximity of Georgetown (short distance, short access time, good road capacity at any time). The urban development on the West bank would also be favoured; that would offer many advantages, lifting real estate pressure in Georgetown and access problems to the exiting port area.



Annex 1: Vehicle Registration (1999 – 2004) Types of vehicles 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Private cars 1309 1404 1544 1264 1300 1886 Hire cars 258 227 210 287 323 471 Buses/ minibuses 676 642 358 277 356 320 Lorries 410 405 300 427 640 530 Jeep - 256 190 229 106 267 Water tenders - - - - - - Land cruiser/ Rover 148 25 30 3 64 5 Construction vehicles 2 - 2 1 - - Hearses 3 2 2 2 - - Ambulances 2 - - 3 - 1 Fire appliances - - - 3 - - Station wagon - 22 15 8 3 69 Motorcycles 1295 1278 1820 1192 2701 2916 Vans/ pick-up 332 294 220 226 97 269 Trailers 220 169 250 197 220 146 Articulated vehicles 17 11 50 15 17 6 Tractors 248 208 75 135 100 46 Total 4920 4943 5066 4269 5927 6932 Source: Guyana Revenue Authority – Internal Revenue, Licence revenue office. It is noted that the vehicle registration data for 2003 and 2004 differ between the various sources referenced.



It can be observed that registration of private vehicles: cars, vans, pick-ups and 4 wheel drive light vehicles had been stagnant from 1999 to 2003 but a surge has been observed in 2003 (1397 vehicles registered in 2003 and 2155 in 2004). Registration of motorcycles has increased steadily in 2003 and 2004: about double the average registration of the four previous years. This increase has pushed noticeably upwards the total number of motor-vehicles registered in the last two years. Registration of buses and minibuses shows a downward trend, which is probably related to a saturation of public transport supply, as shown in the results of our minibus survey (counts of vehicles and passengers boarded at Stabroek terminal area) in March 21 and 22, 2005. This survey indicated that a large share of the minibuses provide only one or two rotations per day, even though they ply on Georgetown urban lines. Registration of hire cars (taxis) surged in 2003 and 2004. Registration of heavy vehicles (Lorries, trailers, and articulated vehicles) follows a moderate upward trend. (It is noted that there are considerable differences in the vehicle fleet data depending on source of origin, and that further TA assistance is recommended, to establish a more up-to-date computer-based enumeration system).



Annex 2: Terms of Reference – Urban Transport Development 1 Background

1.1 Road Network

Roads in Georgetown are divided in four categories: 1) Primary Distributor Roads act as main routes for through traffic.

2) Main Distributor Roads are main roads which carry City’s traffic.

3) Local Distributor Roads carry thorough traffic from residential and commercial areas.

4) Local or Access Roads give direct access to buildings. MPW&C is in charge of the first category for construction and maintenance. Georgetown City Council is in charge of the other three categories. The road network is an incomplete grid with north-south (parallel to the river) and east-west roads which are often not continued throughout the city. The main southern entrance passes through the congested Stabroek Market place and is shared by commercial, industrial and commuter traffic. East of north-south Industry Road, however, there is no through road in east-west direction, except the sea front East Coast Demerara road and the Railway Embankment road. Ogle Regional Airport can only be accessed from those two roads. 1.2 Demerara Harbour Bridge

The Demerara Harbour Bridge (DHB) was opened in 1978 to provide a fixed road link across the Demerara River. Located to the south of the harbour and towards the edge of the Georgetown urban area, it is a steel pontoon floating bridge with 7.2 m of two-lane carriageway and pedestrian sidewalks, providing a crossing of 1.85 km to the West Bank. On average 8400 vehicles per day are crossing the bridge. In midstream it has a retractor span which can be activated to allow the passage of ships and fishing vessels, at high tide. The new bridge provided a more convenient alternative to the vehicle ferry service operated between Stabroek Market and Vreed-en-Hoop by the Transport and Harbours Department (THD). The ferry service was withdrawn in 2004, though reportedly this was due not only to the heavy losses being incurred by THD, but also to silting up of the approaches to the Vreed-en-Hoop Stelling.



By the late 1980s the bridge was experiencing severe maintenance problems, resulting in closure of the facility for a number of days each year. Hence a major rehabilitation project was carried out, supported by the European Development Fund (EDF) with on-site works from 1995 to 1999. While the safety and reliability of the crossing appeared much improved since the rehabilitation, it is anticipated that maintenance needs will start rising again from 2006. Life of the renewed structure was assessed in 1999 at around 15 years, indicating that in the next few years it will be necessary to take decisions on a second rehabilitation or replacement of the crossing, including the possibility of a new concrete bridge. MPW&C intends to carry out a feasibility study for the improvement of Demerara River crossing. The present study should keep in close coordination with MPW&C (Works Services Group) to avoid any contradiction between the two studies. 1.3 Georgetown Harbour

Georgetown harbour spreads over about two nautical miles from Demerara River mouth to the south of Demerara Harbour Bridge, on the East bank of the river. About 35 to 45 commercial vessels call at the Port every month. Maximum draft accepted is 8.2 m on high tide, maximum vessel length overall is 175 m. From the river mouth (lighthouse), main terminals, all of them located on the East (right) bank, are: • MPW&C wharf for landing of quarry products for construction • Timber terminal • Guyana Power and Light Corporation (GPL) oil terminal • Muneshwars Ltd wharf for dry bulk and general cargo • THD ferry wharf (now out of use, except for speed boats providing a link with Vreed-en-

Hoop on the left bank of the river) • MARAD pontoon (pilotage wharf)8 • John Fernandes Ltd. Terminal (main private terminal for bulk cargo and containers) • Demerara Shipping Company Ltd. Terminal (containers, bulk and general cargo) • Trinidad Cement Ltd bulk cement terminal • Guyana National Industrial Corporation terminal (containers, vehicles and general cargo) • Guyana National Shipping Corporation terminal (GNSC is the only publicly owned

shipping company, handling containers, bulk and general cargo) • GUYSUCO sugar terminal (sugar loading and unloading) • Two fishery ports and industries (trawlers and prawn fishing boats) • Floating dry dock for ship repair and maintenance

8 This wharf and the previous are located at the back side of Stabroek Market



• Grain terminal • Shell Antilles Guiana’s Ltd oil terminal • Guyana Oil Company Ltd, Texaco and Esso oil terminals, all located south of Demerara

Harbour Bridge. Land access to those wharfs is problematic. The terminals border the main north-south road in Georgetown, the axis: High Street / Main Street / Avenue of the Republic / Saffron Street / road to CJIA international airport and the city of Linden. This road passes between the City Hall and Stabroek Market, where traffic is particularly dense and difficult. South of Stabroek Market, the road is being widened to four lanes. Wharfs located south of the bridge can only be accessed when the 77m central span of the floating bridge is opened, twice a day at high tide9. The bridge closure to road traffic causes large detention of vehicles, especially if the high tide corresponds to peak traffic periods. 1.4 Ogle and Timehri Airports

Georgetown has two airports: the International Cheddi Jagan International Airport (CJIA) at Timehri, about 40 km south of the City, with a 2270 m runway, and Ogle Airport at the eastern outskirt of the City. CJIA airport registered 3837 international landings in 2004, 425,640 passenger departures or arrivals and 6870 tons of cargo. Ogle Airport has a 560 m paved runway and is currently utilized by STOL aircrafts for domestic services and chartered international services to neighbouring countries. It registered 55,308 passenger movements in 2003 and 4204 tons of cargo. A second, 800 m long, concrete made runway will be ready for operation in March 2006. This runway might be further extended to 1200 m. Ogle airport, operated by a private company (Ogle Airport Inc., leasing the airport from GoG) which finances all extension works, shall progressively become an international airport able to compete to some extent with CJIA. 1.5 Public Transport

Current urban transportation services in Georgetown are based on a fleet of privately operated minibuses. Those minibuses are in great number on the roads (about 1100 operating on suburban lines, 1300 on urban lines), belong to a large number of operators (often owners of no more than a single vehicle) and create great congestion in the terminal area at Stabroek Market, itself located at immediate vicinity of Georgetown Harbour. All urban and suburban minibus routes in Georgetown have their terminal in Stabroek Market area, in the downtown area between the City Hall and Demerara River. The high quantity of vehicles (including taxis which also have terminals in the same area), together with an elevated 9 Tidal range is 2.56 m, with a mean spring range of about 2.50 m and a mean neap range of about 1.20 m



flow of pedestrians (including boarding or alighting passengers); create much disorder on the streets all day long and particularly at morning and afternoon peak hour. Non urban routes should have their terminal in an organized, off-street area properly conditioned with controlled accesses, platforms, shields and lighting, located in the outskirts of the city rather than in the downtown area. Urban routes should serve the interurban terminal by having stops along the sidewalks limiting the contours of the interurban bus terminal, same for taxis. Minibuses are not a safe mode of transportation; access is through sliding doors that can be manipulated by the passengers themselves and are a cause of hazards. To meet the increasing transport demand, minibuses should either be multiplied or replaced by larger vehicles. If they are multiplied to satisfy transport demand they will become a safety problem and a cause for road traffic congestion. Minibus traffic is most intense in the southern approach of the city, where the main road is being widened from two lanes to four. Works on this road will be completed before the end of 2005. The Government of Guyana (GOG) is also considering the construction of an alternative southern entrance to Georgetown in the eastern part of the city. 1.6 Institutional Organization

Institutional responsibility for maintenance and investment in the road transport sector lies with various departments as follows: • Primary distributor roads are under the responsibility of the Ministry of Public Works and

Communications. • All other roads and streets are under the responsibility of the Mayor and City Council. • Specific roads and urban planning lie with the Ministry of Housing and Water. • The Guyana Police Force is responsible for safety components including signalling (traffic

lights, vertical signs, directional signs, road marking), and enforcement. It is also in charge of Georgetown traffic master plan (road use by the different transportation modes, one-way streets pattern, location and fitting up of bus stops).

• Demerara Harbour Bridge is a toll bridge, but revenues scarcely cover operating expenditures including routine maintenance. Any rehabilitation requires subventions from the Government or foreign financial aid.

• There is no Port Authority in Georgetown. Terminals are privately owned and operated. THD (Transport and Harbours Department, MPW&C) is in charge of ferry services along and across the rivers. MARAD is in charge of controlling ships operations and licensing; it provides pilotage, navigation lighting in the Port and downstream, some hydrographic surveys, dredging (one suction dredger generally operating at Essequibo River mouth where a sand bar jeopardizes the ferry crossing).

• Guyana Civil Aviation Authority answers to MPW&C. GCAA applies regulation to airlines, aircraft operators, aerodrome operators, aviation training schools, fuel companies, freight forwarders, and the passengers.



• Ogle airport is operated by Ogle Airport Inc., a private company which leased the airport from GoG for 25 years with extension periods of 25 years on request of the lessee. Maintenance and new investments are supported by OAI.

• CJIA airport is managed by a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Cheddi Jagan International Corporation (CJIAC) reporting, through a Board of Directors, to the Minister of Public Works and Communications. It is not yet a self supporting business since GoG still provides a subvention.

2 Study Objectives

2.1 Global Objectives

The Government of Guyana wishes to conduct a Study, focusing mainly on Georgetown road network development, improvement of accesses to the City, to the West bank of Demerara River, to the Harbour many wharves, to Ogle and CJIA airports, to zones of activity (administration, university, hospital, commerce, industries). Longer term port development scenarios, including the construction of a new containers terminal, should be part of the scheme. The study shall involve institutional strengthening, road infrastructure planning, traffic and parking management, road safety management, feasibility of bus terminals for suburban and interurban buses: I. Institutional strengthening of the Ministry of Public Works and Communications and the

Mayor and City Council offices and clarification of the transport policy to be implemented in coherence with current and prospective Georgetown urban development. Legal and regulatory aspects shall be included in the study process.

II. Road infrastructure planning for the medium (10 years) and long term (over 15 years), setting up a coherent, economical, demand based supply of roads consistent with the traffic forecasts. This task will require a modelling of the road infrastructure and transport supply, as well as existing transport demand. That transport model, once fitted up to the current situation, will be utilized for establishing transport demand forecasts and testing scenarios and variants for an expanded and improved road infrastructure and transport supply. Such improvements may include a new orbital expressway (ring road) and/or additional investments in cross river bridges. They will also include access to the future containers terminal and main existing wharfs. Whenever feasible, low cost infrastructure investments will be proposed, such as the opening of short sections to open new continuous itineraries throughout the city and lower the stress on existing through roads.

III. Traffic management and road safety improvements. This shall include final designs for solutions to raise the capacity of the urban road system, upgrading intersections, implementing one-way street patterns while keeping in mind the requirements for efficient



road safety management, and environmental issues. A scheme of off-street bus stops will be proposed and designed to eliminate any bottleneck on main roads which is occasioned by the stopping of buses (minibuses) on-street to let passengers board or alight from the vehicles.

IV. Setting up of a coherent, economical, demand based supply of public transport, able to provide a competitive alternative to private car use in the city, and lower traffic congestion in Georgetown business district and harbour area as well as on main accesses to the city downtown area. Adaptation of vehicles size and characteristics to actual transport demand will be part of the scheme, considering the vehicle operating costs to keep transport as economical as possible.

Preliminary studies were conducted by Lea Consultants Ltd from Netherlands; two reports were produced, titled “Public Transport Study Report” and “Georgetown Arterial Road System”. Those studies shall be the reference and starting point for the new study. Additional studies include “The Greater Georgetown Development Plan” urban development study by the Ministry of Housing and Water. The proposed study is expected to corroborate and incorporate existing data and analysis of these completed studies. 2.2 Policy and Institutional Strengthening

Institutional responsibilities for urban transport will be reviewed and recommendations made for strengthening in order to improve efficiency, transparency, and accountability. A clear distinction of responsibilities must be established between central government and municipal agencies. • Institutional weakness should be addressed to improve port, road and public transport

administration and planning, traffic management, and enforcement. • Areas requiring technical assistance for capacity building in infrastructure management

should be assessed. 2.3 Transport Demand Surveys

The Consultant shall design a zoning of the City and its suburbs, including Timehri and the Demerara West Bank. This zoning will be based on the identification of homogeneous areas of the City and its suburbs, in terms of land use and activities. The Consultant shall gather socio-economic data, per zone: population, jobs, level of revenues, activity rate (or unemployment), schools and universities with their number of pupils and students. More general data on motorization, home size (average number of people per home, of



active people per home) and income shall be collected, through sample home surveys as necessary. Socio-economic data shall be expanded at 5 and 10 years terms for the purpose of estimating future transport demand. 2.4 Public Transport

Public transport services in Georgetown are provided mainly by minibuses and hire cars (taxis) and to a smaller extent large buses, single occupancy taxis, and a small percentage of animal-drawn vehicles. Public transport vehicles ply their route between central locations in the city to final destinations within or out of the city. Several agencies are responsible at different levels, for the administration of public transport systems and the consultant will be required to review existing responsibilities and regulations and develop short term (up to five (5) years) and medium term (ten years) plans for organizational and management improvement to existing public transport services for phased implementation. This will include: • A review of current legal, institutional, financial and management structures; • Identify current transport supply: bus routes and their variants, frequencies, travel time or

commercial speeds; • Review past and present public transport resources, costs, fares and other revenues; • Estimate operating costs of minibuses; • Discussions with stakeholders on existing problem areas and identification of opportunities

for improvements; • Identification of appropriate bus terminal areas and preliminary design of those terminals. In order to complete the available data base on public transport supply and demand, the Consultant shall carry out public transport vehicles and passenger counts as well as origin-destination surveys at terminals and main bus stops. Departures of minibuses at Stabroek Market terminal area have been surveyed by GOPA Consultants in 2005 for two consecutive week days (Monday and Tuesday 21 and 22 March), from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m.. Flows of departing vehicles and passengers per line and per hour, supply of seats, were counted as well as the number of vehicles operating on each line and number of rotations operated by the vehicles. 2.5 Traffic Management and Road Safety Improvements

The Consultant will identify existing bottlenecks and infrastructure deficiencies, and produce final designs for solutions to ease traffic congestion, including:



• Identify existing routes to be upgraded by overlay, widening, and other structural improvements;

• Develop traffic management plans including one-way street schemes; • Design traffic improvements including intersection design improvement, signalling, traffic

lights, road marking, bus stops fitting up, etc.; • Design parking facilities wherever necessary; propose concrete measures such as park

meters, in order to keep private car use under control in Georgetown downtown area; • Identify dedicated routes for freight and commercial vehicles as advisable; this concerns in

particular heavy traffic to and from Georgetown Harbour; • Develop policies for freight delivery vehicles with regards to on-street parking, loading /

unloading zones, and regulation of freight delivery schedules; • Devise if possible, measures for segregating slow-moving two-wheeled and non motorized

traffic; • Examine measures for giving priority within the urban network to efficient and cost

effective public transport services. Since the traffic data base in Georgetown is very limited, the Consultant shall design, organize and carry out the necessary traffic counts: section counts on main through roads and directional counts per category of vehicles at main intersections. A minimum of forty (40) intersections shall be involved in that survey. Traffic Forecasts will be made for a 5 and 10 year planning horizon. 3 Expertise Required

To carry out the Study, the Consultant team shall involve: The Team Leader, Civil Engineer or Transport Economist with over 10 years experience in the developing world, in studies related to this Project, and in institutional strengthening. His presence in Guyana will be 5 months; additional time at headquarters is left to the appreciation of the Consultant. An Urban Planner, with over 10 years experience in urban planning, including over 5 years in the developing world. He should be experienced in collecting and processing socio-economic data. His presence in Guyana will be 0.75 month, complemented by 0.25 month at the Consultant headquarters (total 1 month). A Public Transport Expert, with over 10 years experience in the operation of city bus networks and/or urban transport planning, including at least 5 years in developing countries. He should be experienced in designing, carrying out and processing public transport surveys. His presence in Guyana will be 2 months.



A Transport Modelling Expert, with over 5 years experience in urban areas transport modelling. His presence in Guyana will be 2 months, complemented by 0.5 months at the Consultant headquarters (total 2.5 months). A Traffic Engineer, with over 10 years experience in traffic management and engineering in urban areas, including at least 5 years in developing countries. He should be experienced in designing, carrying out and processing traffic counts. His presence in Guyana will be 3.5 months. 4 Duration of the Study

The Study should start within 2 weeks, once notification of the contract has been received by the Consultant. The Study should be completed not later than 8 months after the mobilization date. 5 Output

■ An Inception Report providing a detailed schedule of tasks and a schedule of expert’s interventions will be delivered no more than four (4) weeks after the start of the works. This report shall make an assessment of available previous studies and data and shall provide the first findings.

■ Brief Monthly progress reports shall be delivered, describing tasks progress and providing a

synthetic description of Study developments. ■ A Draft Final Report shall provide a synthesis of the whole study, with all necessary

annexes to be a self-sufficient report; it will include an executive summary of the complete study.

The Consultant should receive observations from the Guyanese administration on the content of the Draft Final Report no more than four weeks after this report has been effectively delivered. A final version of the Final Report shall be produced, taking into consideration the observations of the Guyanese administration. All reports shall be delivered in English language, in __ hard copies and one electronic version on CD-R.



Annex 3: Revised Version by GOPA of Draft ToR submitted by MPW&C / Works Services Group – Demerara River Crossing

0 Abbreviations

GoG: Government of Guyana MPW&C: Ministry of Public Works and Communications WSG: Works Services Group, dependency of MPW&C BOT: Built, Operate, Transfer DBOT: Design, Built, Operate, Transfer VOC: Vehicle operation costs NPV: Net present value B / C: Ratio “total actualized benefits / total actualized costs” NPV: Net present value EIRR: Economic internal rate of return I Background and Consultancy Objective

The Demerara River is about 1.8 km wide at the level of the southern part of Georgetown Harbour, itself spreading about 2 nautical miles along the city, on the East bank of the river. Before 1978 the Demerara River could only be crossed by ship, specifically the ferry crossing between Stabroek Market terminal in the centre of the city, and Vreed-en-Hoop terminal on the West Bank. Since 1978, the river is crossed south of the city, by a floating (or pontoon) steel bridge, described in section 1.3 hereafter. The objective of the consultancy is to conduct a technical, economic, financial and environ-mental feasibility study of the various alternatives which may be considered to provide an optimum solution for Demerara River crossing and its approach roads. The study shall estimate the economic costs and benefits of each plausible alternative for the crossing of Demerara River together with its approach roads and determine their economic and financial viability. It will consider all financial costs for construction, operation and maintenance (routine, rehabilitations) of each alternative, and identify the possibility of an auto-financing of the project through socially acceptable toll fares. A BOT10 solution, or even a DBOT11 might be considered, and their feasibility should be assessed.

10 Build, Operate and Transfer 11 Design, Build, Operate and Transfer



The Demerara Harbour Bridge, a toll bridge crossing the Demerara River, is a major integration link between Georgetown/East Demerara and West Demerara/Essequibo Regions. It is a Steel Pontoon Floating Bridge with 7.2 m of two-lane carriageway, 1.2 m wide pedestrian sidewalk, and no proper collision protection. The length of the bridge is 1850 m and consists of 61 spans supported by floating piers. The bridge was constructed in 1978 and designed to last ten years before major rehabilitation. Such rehabilitation work was completed in 1995 at a cost of US$ 9.0M by Damien Ship Yards of the Netherlands and funded by the EU. Rehabilitation included the replacement of all floating piers, retractor span structure and the replacement of all hydraulic and mechanical components of the retractor span. This extended the bridge life for 15 years, coming to an end in 2010. An average of 8,400 vehicles cross the bridge daily. The bridge is retracted once a day for one and a half hours, causing major delays and congestion. At present revenues collected amount approximately to US$ 1.0M a year, which is sufficient to cover operation and routine maintenance costs only. The bridge is scheduled for periodic maintenance in 2007 and the revenues collected cannot offset this cost. The products of the study may be used to provide support to the government of Guyana in setting up a tendering procedure for contracting the construction and possibly the detailed design of the selected river crossing alternative, and/or negotiate a BOT or a DBOT. The Consultants will apply the most applicable version of the VOC component and all other cost or benefits of the HDM model as appropriate, or use a similar methodology. Diagram A3- 1: Map Showing Location of Demerara Harbour Bridge



II Contents of the Study

The study shall be divided into the following major phases: I. Assessment of the Current Situation

II. Database Development

III. Preliminary Engineering of Plausible Alternatives for the River Crossing

IV. Environmental Feasibility

V. Economic and Financial Evaluation

VI. Public Consultations Guidelines PHASE I. Assessment of Current Situation

Assessment of current situation should at least include: 1.1 Background Description

■ Population characteristics of urbanized and rural areas on both sides of the river, as far as the Berbice River to the East, the city of Linden to the South and Essequibo River to the West – growth rates and population forecasts at 5, 10, 15 years

■ Identification of main trip generators: port terminals, administrations, schools and universities, hospitals, commercial centres, central business district, etc.

■ Natural features and topography ■ Necessary links with the existing road network ■ Agricultural, industrial, and commercial activity ■ Environmental factors ■ Climatic factors 1.2 Economic Data

■ Economic activity in the impact zone as described above ■ Macro-economic growth rates ■ Regional/sector output projections (agriculture, industry, commerce) ■ Employment ■ Household income ■ Vehicle fleet characteristics and growth rates



1.3 Current Demerara River Crossing

■ Description and assessment of the condition of the existing bridge ■ Current vessel traffic on Demerara River, size of ships, evolution trends ■ Location, type and condition of Harbour terminals ■ Speed boat operations ■ Perspectives for a new container terminal on Demerara River ■ Bottlenecks (Road traffic/ River traffic) ■ Safety considerations: road safety on existing bridge, on river crossing alternatives, risks

of vessel collision with the bridge PHASE II. Data Base Development

Data base development should at least include: 2.1 Current Road Traffic

■ AADT12 by vehicle type on the floating bridge and its access roads, on West Bank Demerara and East Bank Demerara roads

■ Vehicle occupancy by vehicle type ■ Industrial/commercial/passenger traffic ■ Vehicular traffic from Suriname, French Guiana and Brazil ■ Vehicle loads including axle loads and degree of overloading ■ Origin/Destination characteristics of trips, obtained my means of an O/D survey to be

carried out during a minimum of two working days, by the Consultant, at Demerara Harbour Bridge toll gate

■ Commodity flows and seasonality ■ Agricultural marketing/transportation costs 2.2 Engineering Surveys

The surveys listed below shall be carried out by the Consultant, with the aim of collecting information appropriate for a bridge feasibility study:

12 Annual Average Daily Traffic



■ Road survey (road condition surveys of existing approach roads) ■ Condition surveys of existing bridge, to complement information already gathered by

MPW&C ■ Land surveys (for alternative bridge sites and new approach roads) ■ Hydrographic surveys (in vicinity of proposed bridge sites) ■ Subsurface soil investigations to estimate the dimensions of the bridge foundation and

substructure 2.3 Maintenance Standards

■ Maintenance policies ■ Maintenance procedures ■ Maintenance backlog 2.4 Vehicle and Bridge Operating Cost Data

■ Collection and analysis of basic VOC data from local sources, with taxes and without taxes

■ Ownership and government-imposed costs ■ Socially acceptable fares, revenue collected by the bridge system ■ Economic cost to marine traffic due to floating bridge opening restrictions ■ Economic cost to vehicular traffic due to floating bridge opening 2.5 Freight Flows and Potential

■ Issues associated with cross-border flow of freight from Brazil, French Guiana and Suriname into Guyana

■ Potential to generate additional freight traffic to/from Guyanese ports with enhanced transportation facilities across the Demerara River

■ Analysis of regional economic potential of West Guyana focusing on the short-term potential to increase exports and/or absorb imports from Georgetown port as a result of enhanced transportation across the Demerara River

2.6 Economic Activity Significantly Tied to Quality of Transportation Facilities

■ Economic activity significantly tied to quality of transportation across the Demerara River



■ Potential for further land development on western shores of the Demerara River linked to growth of West Demerara with construction of a bridge without closure of road traffic

■ Identify key industries in Guyana, the competitiveness and quality of service of which could be significantly enhanced by the improved freight (such as movements of goods to ports) and passengers (such as tourism) transportation benefits

■ Estimate the impact of an improved and uninterrupted Demerara River crossing on agricultural production and other economic activities

2.7 Road Traffic Projections

■ AADT projections (normal, generated, diverted) for an uninterrupted Demerara River crossing, at 5, 10 and 15 years terms, for each of the identified river crossing alternatives, across the river and on approach roads.

2.8 Vessel Traffic Projections

■ Projections of average daily flow of vessels on the Demerara River, at 5, 10 and 15 years terms, taking into consideration the container terminal project

PHASE III. Preliminary Engineering

3.1 River Crossing Variants

■ Location and alignment of road approaches for each site -Crossing location and alignment for each site

■ General description of river crossing variants ■ Vertical and horizontal clearances offered to vessels in each variant ■ Protection from collision by vessels ■ Navigational aids – lighting systems in each variant ■ Toll collection system 3.2 Engineering Design of Variants

For the existing floating bridge, it will be sufficient to review the available information. MPW&C will provide the consulting firm with the information on the floating bridge design and any relevant information developed in previous studies. MPW&C will also provide to



the Consultant available data necessary to permit cost estimates for alternative bridge sites and bridge variants. For other bridge variants, the Consultant will provide a preliminary engineering design: ■ Design of bridge and road approaches for each site: plan, elevation, longitudinal profile,

typical sections for every span, piles and foundations ■ Description of the construction mode for each bridge variant: metallic structure,

reinforced concrete or pre-stressed reinforced concrete ■ Structure of the pavement, joints ■ Sidewalks and guardrails, lighting of the roadway ■ Buildings and operational facilities for operation, toll gate, administration and police

(plan, elevation, typical sections, foundations) 3.3 Construction

■ Description of the equipment and machinery required for the construction of each variant

■ Description of materials (crushed stone, bituminous concrete, etc.) required for each variant

■ Material sourcing ■ Traffic management measures during construction period 3.4 Project Cost Estimates

■ Bill of quantities and unit cost analysis ■ Cost estimation for each variant of the bridge, and approach roads for each site PHASE IV. Environmental and Social Feasibility

4.1 Environmental impact

The environmental impact study would be done for the following purposes: A. Evaluation of the direct and indirect environmental impacts. B. Mitigating measures to limit the direct and indirect environmental impacts. Some of these

measures might have to be included in the engineering designs.



C. Identification of the agencies responsible for implementation of some of the mitigating measures.

D. Estimation of mitigating measures costs and identification of possible sources of

financing. E. Recommendations for a resettlement plan and compensation of the displaced population,

in accordance with IDB’s specific guidelines for involuntary resettlements. F. Advise MPW&C in the public consultations with the affected communities and other

interested entities, and keep records of those consultations for attachment to the environmental analysis reports.

4.2 Environmental Impact Evaluation

The evaluation of the project’s environmental impact shall satisfy the following technical requirements: 4.2.1 Area of study

The area of study will be determined to include all areas in which the project may generate environmental impacts. The area generally adjacent to the bridge infrastructure, where the general impacts in the stages of execution of the works and use of the bridge are most direct and intensive, constitutes the area of direct influence. The remaining area, where the effects are indirect and of lower intensity, is the area of indirect influence. These areas of direct and indirect influence must be delineated on a map at an appropriate scale, which shall show: • The population centres, protected areas, and principal services.

• Other representative physical, biotic, socioeconomic and cultural features, if possible. The study shall include a characterization of the principal socio-environmental aspects that could be subject to indirect impacts during use of the road. Since the envisaged works on the bridge under consideration are not largely confined to the proposed bridge alignment, the evaluation of environmental impacts must centre on the area of direct environmental influence (ADEI), defined as a band 2km wide (1km on either side of the midline) throughout the length of the bridge, which shall include: • The existing areas of human concentration;

• The right of way and the areas required for encampments, quarries, dumps, fills, asphalt plants, etc.



Whenever the bridge passes close to ecologically fragile and/or protected areas, such as archaeological areas and human settlements, the ADEI shall be widened to permit evaluation of the impacts of the works and use of the highway in those areas. 4.2.2 Environmental evaluation

4.2.2.1 Identification and evaluation of indirect and direct impacts during execution of the works and when the bridge comes into use. 4.2.2.2 Characterization of the physical and biological aspects of the ecosystems in the area of environmental influence traversed by the bridge, especially in regard to the potential for soil erosion, instability of the ground, and risks to the associated flora and fauna. 4.2.2.3 Demarcation of the fragile and/or protected ecosystems located in the vicinity of the bridge. 4.2.2.4 Identification of the waterways crossed by the bridge and the environmental problems resulting from narrowing of their widths, erosion, sedimentation, blockage of streambeds, etc. 4.2.2.5 Evaluation of the principal water uses and recommending measures for protection against accidents involving vehicles carrying hazardous materials. 4.2.2.6 Characterization of the use and occupancy of the soil and evaluation of the potential impact from probable increased occupancy of the area. 4.2.2.7 Identification of the archaeological, historical and tourist sites in proximity to the bridge and evaluation of the positive and negative impacts of improved access to these areas. If the bridge and its approach roads traverses or affects areas of archaeological interest, the Consultant shall contact environmental authorities and ascertain the legal status of the area and the specifications and requirements of the Institute for appropriate treatment of the case. 4.2.2.8 If expropriation and compensation of the inhabitants becomes necessary, the Consultant will identify the socioeconomic characterization of the population directly affected, to help the administration prepare resettlement plans in accordance with IDB’s guidelines for involuntary resettlements. 4.2.2.9 Identification of the settlements traversed by the bridge and approach roads and determination of the functional socioeconomic relations of the population, in order to determine the infrastructures needed for pedestrians, non motorized transportation, bus stops, special measures in the vicinity of schools, hospitals, and recreational areas, etc. Also, presentation of a map on an appropriate scale showing the socio-environmental aspects of the project’s direct area of influence.



4.2.2.10 The environmental specialist will participate with project engineering team in the preparation of, among other things: a. A map of the bridge and approach roads on an appropriate scale of the area of direct

environmental influence (ADEI), showing the locations of the existing human settlements, the rights-of-way, the areas required for encampments, quarries, dumps, asphalt plants, crushers, machine yards, unstable areas, creeks and rivers crossed by the highway, areas of landslides, etc., and extending that area of influence to include ecologically fragile and/or protected areas, and archaeological, tourist, historical and other settled areas, on which impacts will be exerted during execution of the highway works and use of the roadway.

b. Identification of places where people congregate, such as markets, schools, health centres, municipal government buildings, main squares, fairgrounds, etc., located within a band of up to 200m on either side of the road midline.

c. Measures for the protection of pedestrian and non-motorized traffic: recommendations for widths of sidewalks, traffic signals and other elements of road safety.

d. The bridge and approach roads design shall highlight the traffic and speed standards proposed for the bridge and approach road. In particular, it shall highlight the speed limits in critical areas.

e. Recommendation of the environmental characterization of the areas proposed for implementation of the supporting infrastructure for the works (asphalt plants, encampments, quarries, disposal areas, borrow pits and fills, fuel storage, and service roads, among others). This characterization shall cover, among others, the aspects of relief, plant cover, surface and ground drainage, the direction of the prevailing winds, accessibility, and proximity to protected archaeological areas.

On the basis of the resulting characterizations, definition of the recommended areas, performance of the preliminary studies for the plan for recovery and use of the selected areas, and estimation of the corresponding costs for inclusion in the project budget. Also, recommendation of the specific measures for the control of degradation in and environmental recovery of each of the selected areas, and framing of the rules of behaviour for the workers for environmental safeguards and relations with settlements in the vicinity of the encampments.

f. The Consultant shall recommend locations for dumps and storage of materials so that they will not become environmental problems by, for example, causing the damming and pollution of rivers and creeks, instability of natural slopes, and effects on flora and fauna. The aspects of potentially usable sites to be considered must include the possibility of conflicts with their owners or with environmental or municipal authorities. Finally, the recommended dump and storage sites must be such as can be reconstituted and replanted for integration into the landscape on completion of the works.



4.2.3 Evaluation of Environmental Liabilities

4.2.3.1 The environmental liabilities usually generated by bridges are the impacts on third parties from existence of the road and the impacts of third parties on it. Examples of impacts classed as environmental liabilities are: a. Landslides and slumps, cave-ins, and slope instability b. Erosion, silting, streambed obstruction c. Water pollution d. Ecological and landscape damage in fragile areas. e. Areas degraded by quarrying and extraction of other materials for the works, the opening of

service roads, encampments, etc. f. Accesses to and local roads and streets of human settlements blocked by the highway. g. Damage to sources of water of human settlements and/or of irrigation canals along the

highway. h. Occupation of the right-of-way. 4.2.3.2 To identify the environmental liabilities the Consultant will have to carry out the following activities: a. Mount in an annex photographs of the most important and unusual features of the

environmental liabilities. b. Enter on a map on an appropriate scale the environmental liabilities detected for the bridge

and approach roads. The map shall contain, at a minimum, the urban areas near the main highway and the watercourses and secondary roads that cross or connect to the highway under evaluation.

c. Classify the environmental liabilities as critical and non-critical in accordance with the definitions proposed by the consultant and accepted by the MPW&C.

d. For the critical liabilities include, in addition to the information referred to in the above enumeration, a characterization of the works, services and/or corrective measures recommended, including schematic sketches of the solutions proposed, a determination of the quantities, costs and budget and the critical environmental liabilities to be eliminated or mitigated in the works.



4.3 Environmental Management Plan

An environmental management plan shall be drawn up, which shall include: a) A corrective/prescribed program, a detailed description of each mitigation measure

proposed, the impact to which it relates, the conditions under which it will be required (in the design, before or during construction, permanently, for contingencies, etc.), and its design requirements and procedures for its execution.

b) A program for environmental follow-up or monitoring. Definition of the institutional responsibilities for implementation of each mitigation measures, including (i) operation, (ii) maintenance, (iii) control and supervision during construction and operation of the works, and (iv) environmental monitoring.

c) Guidelines for setting up a program for social compensation /expropriations. d) A resettlement program (if necessary). e) An investment program. A timetable and estimated budget for all investments and

recurrent costs in implementation of the environmental management plan. f) A timetable of the activities, which must be synchronized with the activities for

construction of the main components of the project. The expected components of the management plan include: (i) environmental measures for the maintenance of surface and ground water courses and the

preservation of their quality and of aquatic fauna; (ii) control of atmospheric emissions (dust and gasses) and noise which affect the workers,

neighbouring inhabitants, crops or the general environment; (iii) measures to restore the areas impaired by the installation and operation of asphalt plants,

quarries, crushers, etc., to their natural condition; (iv) special measures to attenuate the barrier effect of the works and to avoid disturbing the

native flora and fauna; (v) appropriate quarrying procedures to avoid excessive degradation of the areas to be worked

and, afterwards, levelling, earth-filling, replanting and other needed measures to restore the quarried areas to their natural condition;

(vi) appropriate procedures for using the areas slated as dumps for refuse and spoil from levelling and other wastes, with due regard for the design of the dumps, how materials are to be placed in them, and appropriate cover to ensure their stability.

(vii) measures to offset impacts that cannot be mitigated, such as compensation to owners of land, structures and other installations to be affected by the widening of the road;

(viii) Identification of the costs and benefits of the mitigation and the environmental management plans in order to including them in the economic-environmental evaluation.

(ix) Measures to manage spills of fuels and oils, and their disposal.



4.4 Final Report on the Environmental Impact Study

The final report on the environmental impact study to be presented must be analytical and concise, and emphasize the significant social and environmental problems, the measures and actions recommended, and the costs and responsibilities involved. PHASE V. Economic and Financial Evaluation of River Crossing Alternatives

The economic and financial evaluation shall include for each alternative and site: 5.1 Economic Evaluation

5.1.1 User and non-user benefits

■ Capacity increases for road traffic, for vessels traffic ■ Vehicle operating and maintenance cost savings ■ Vessels operating cost savings ■ Generated/diverted traffic impact ■ Time savings for vehicles, for vessels ■ Road safety benefits ■ Maintenance cost savings ■ Increased investment in adjacent areas ■ Other benefits 5.1.2 Economic costs of each alternative

■ Investment costs ■ Operating costs (staff, etc.) ■ Maintenance costs ■ Costs reliability 5.1.3 Economic Evaluation of alternatives

■ Cost Analysis of proposed crossing and approach roads for each alternative ■ Economic feasibility indicators (NPV, C/B, EIRR) for proposed crossing and access roads

for each alternative ■ First Year Rate of Return (FYRR) ■ Optimum Year For Opening ■ Sensitivity analysis ■ Comparison of alternative cases and selection of best option



5.2 Financial Evaluation

■ Proposed toll and tariff structures; estimate of income and expenditure flows simulating realistic tariffs

■ Estimate cost of GOG commitments and contingent liabilities ■ Determine government expenditures as investment and subsidies to the project, ■ Sensitivity/risk analysis ■ Determination of timing and project phasing ■ Analyse BOT/DBOT possibility and conditions for its success 5.3 Other impacts

■ Estimate the potential for additional economic development linked to the transportation benefits of the proposed crossing

■ Calculate any 'multiplier' of indirect and induced economic benefits based on evidence of such benefits from comparable projects in comparable economies elsewhere

■ Agricultural marketing/ productivity improvements ■ Increased investment in adjacent areas ■ Job creation in Guyana due to construction activities ■ Use of local firms as suppliers, contractors and subcontractors ■ Technology transfer PHASE VI. Public Consultations Guidelines

6.1 Purposes

The main purpose of the public consultations is to inform the general public from the opening phase of the study of the intention of the MPW&C to go forward with the project, and hence to listen to the expectations and concerns of the population regarding the scope of the project before the studies are done and its implementation begins. If necessary, to the extent possible it will be endeavoured to incorporate into the design and development of the project such proposals of the population as are found reasonable and compatible with it. In addition, the population will have to be informed that properties will probably be affected by the need to acquire lands for the project and/or the construction of alternate routes. These specific consultations will be conducted by MPW&C with assistance from the Consultant, and alternatives studied before the final design of the project is completed. The Consultant shall recommend a compensation and resettlement plan.



6.2 Levels of consultation

6.2.1 General

The first level of public consultation is that which addresses the entire population, and has, among others, the following features: 1- It will be directed by the MPW&C, and the Consultant will provide support and advisory

services. 2- It will be addressed to the general population in the area of direct influence of the project

and to its authorities and representatives, such as Mayors, Heads of Communities, Chairman of Irrigation Boards, other Government Institutions, NGOs, etc. The announce-ment will be made through the local and regional broadcast media and/or by direct invita-tion if deemed advisable.

3- It will be for information purposes and to obtain data needed for a proper analysis of the alternatives, and must hence be initiated at an early stage of the feasibility study.

4- Presentations and responses must be completely open, and offers must be made that are reliably feasible and will be made good (as a matter of credibility).

5- The presentation must be schematic (in the form of sketches instead of plans, for example), and must be as instructive and specific as possible.

6- A record must be kept (by preference, in the form of recordings and transcriptions to be included as annexes to the environmental impact study) of the public consultations, and a mechanism devised by which the population can transmit its questions to the MPW&C at any time during the study.

7- The Consultant in charge of performance of the environmental impact study must include as an annex to the final report on the study, the record of public consultations and a discussion of the reasons why the views of the population have or have not been incorporated into the final project. The final report on the environmental impact study shall be made available to the public (in, for example, the library of a major urban settlement).

8- If the community raises major considerations or significant changes are made in the alternatives presented or important points are raised in relation to the design proposals, a second consultation will be held to monitor the project.

6.2.2 Specific

The second level of public consultation will take place after selection of one or two variants. It is addressed specifically to the population whose properties will probably be affected by the construction of alternate routes or by the widening of the road/construction of alternates at intersections in urban settlements for purposes of road safety. Some of the salient features of this level of consultation are as follows:



1- It will be directed by the MPW&C, and the Consultant will provide support and advisory

services. 2- The participants will be the population who will probably be affected by implementation of

the project. 3- The presentation must be completely open in the technical, economic and social aspects of

selected alternatives. 4- The presentation must be schematic (in the form of sketches instead of plans, for example),

and must be as instructive and specific as possible. 5- A record must be carried of the communal assemblies (minutes would be advisable) and a

summary made of the points discussed and of any agreements reached with those whose properties are likely to be affected by implementation of the project.

6- The environmental impact study must include an item in the chapter on the analysis and selection of the alternatives developed.

7- The Consultant shall assist MPW&C in planning and organizing public consultations addressing specifically the population that will be affected by the future project.

III Characteristics of the Consultancy

3.1 Type of consultancy: International consulting firm. 3.2 Duration: The estimated time required to produce the deliverables below is 8 months from

contract signing. 3.3 Place of work: Guyana and place of residence. 3.4 Qualifications: Consultants must have ample experience in preparing economic and

financial analyses of transport projects, including intimate knowledge of modern economic methodologies for estimation of project benefits with limited information. Consultants must also have experience in Guyana or countries with similar economic and physical characteristics. The language of all conversations and reports will be English.

IV Expertise Required

To carry out the Study, the Consultant team shall involve: The Team Leader, Civil Engineer with over 10 years experience in the developing world, in studies related to this Project, and in structural engineering. His presence in Guyana will be 6 months; additional time at headquarters is left to the appreciation of the Consultant. A Structure Engineer, with over 10 years experience in engineering studies of bridges, including over 5 years in the developing world. His presence in Guyana will be a minimum of 2.5 months, complemented by 1.5 month at the Consultant headquarters (total 4 months).



An Assistant Structure Engineer, specialized in computerized design and production of plans, with over 5 years experience in design of bridges and structures. A Macro-Economist with over 10 years experience in macro-economy, including over 5 years in the developing world. His presence in Guyana will be 1 month. A Transport Economist with over 10 years experience in transport economics, including over 5 years in the developing world. His presence in Guyana will be 3 months; additional time at headquarters is left to the appreciation of the Consultant. A Socio-economist with over 10 years experience in socio-economy, data collection and processing, including over 5 years in the developing world. His presence in Guyana will be 2 months. An Environment Expert with over 10 years experience including at least 5 years in the developing world, in studies related to this Project. His presence in Guyana will be 3 months; additional time at headquarters is left to the appreciation of the Consultant. Total amount of man-months provided by the Consultant in Guyana will be 17.5. Maximum number of man-months at the Consultant residence will be 4.5. Overall amount of man-months therefore should not exceed 22.0 (twenty two). V REPORTS

The Consultant will carry out the analysis in both Guyana and site of residence. It is estimated that the initial stage of collecting data and assessing options will take six to eight weeks in the field. The Consultants will use the remaining time to examine the data collected and perform the analysis itself. 5.1 Inception Report detailing methodology and schedule of activities, four weeks after

the start of the project (Consultant mobilization, to occur two weeks after approval of the contract and official notification to start the works).

5.2 Assessment of Current Situation Report, two (2) months after the start of the project.

5.3 Database Development Report, three (3) months after the start of the project. 5.4 Preliminary Engineering Report, four and a half (4.5) months after the start of the

project. 5.5 Environmental Report, six (6) months after the start of the project. 5.6 Economic and Financial Evaluation Report, seven (7) months after the start of the

project.



5.7 Draft Final Report providing an Executive Summary of the Study, eight (8) months after the start of the project.

MPW&C shall provide its comments on each report no more than three (3) weeks after its delivery. If comments are not provided to the Consultant at the end of that period, the report will be deemed approved.



Annex 4: Note on Demerara Harbour Bridge 1 Introduction

The Demerara Harbour Bridge (DHB) was opened in 1978 to provide a fixed road link across the Demerara River. Located to the south of the harbour limits and towards the edge of the Georgetown urban area, it is a pontoon bridge providing a crossing of 1.8 km to the West Bank. In midstream it has a retractor span which can be activated to allow the passage of ships and fishing vessels. The new bridge provided a more convenient alternative to the vehicle ferry service operated between Stabroek Market and Vreed-en-Hoop by the Transport and Harbours Department (THD). Though this service continued to operate, it immediately lost a high proportion of its traffic. The service was eventually withdrawn in 2004, though reportedly this was due not only to the heavy losses being incurred by THD, but also to silting up of the approaches to the Vreed-en-Hoop Stelling. By the late 1980s the bridge was experiencing severe maintenance problems, resulting in closure of the facility for a number of days each year. Hence a major rehabilitation project was carried out, supported by the European Development Fund (EDF), with feasibility study in 1993, a financing agreement in 1994, and on-site works from 1995 to 1999. Cost of the rehabilitation was € 8.4 million. While the safety and reliability of the crossing appear much improved since the rehabilitation, it is anticipated that maintenance needs will start rising again from 2006. Life of the renewed structure was assessed in 1999 at around 15 years, indicating that in the next few years it will be necessary to take decisions on a second rehabilitation or replacement of the crossing, including the possibility of a new concrete bridge. 2 Maintenance

Maintenance needs are necessarily high for a pontoon crossing, especially in a harsh salt-water environment. Particular problems experienced with the Georgetown crossing have included the following: • corrosion, • problems with deck plates, • stability of concrete anchorage blocks, • fragility of cables, • High stresses on the retractor span chords.



Routine maintenance operations are regularly carried out by the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation (DHBC), and can be funded direct from operating revenues. However, other than routine operations have to be financed by additional government subvention, which reportedly may be insufficient or sometimes not even received at all. From 2006 there will be regular requirements for the replacement of pontoons. If some larger maintenance activities have to be deferred owing to shortage of available funds (see below), the eventual result will be to accelerate deterioration of the bridge, thus necessitating higher and perhaps earlier eventual expenditure on rehabilitation or construction. 3 Operations

The passage of ocean-going vessels and fishing boats to and from locations upstream of the bridge requires regular closure of the bridge. This is generally arranged in advance, and publicly advertised, for a period of one and a half hours each day. While it is necessary to ensure that the bridge closure takes place close to the high tide, it is also necessary to ensure that road traffic is not interrupted during the normal rush hours (0700-0830 and 1600-1800). The result is that not only is the passage of road traffic regularly interrupted (with inevitable congestion effects, including backing up onto the East Bank Road), but also vessels are severely constrained, and unable to pass at the best state of the tide. Delays thus occur to both road and river traffic. Safety and reliability are also significant issues. Safety issues include the possibility of displacement of deck plates, regular cable fractures, and the danger of vessel collision with the structure. Before the rehabilitation such problems caused regular closures, with the bridge being out of service for no fewer than 64 days in 1991 (17.5 per cent of the year). 4 Traffic

After reportedly stagnating during the 1980s, bridge traffic started rising steadily in the 1990s. Hence total recorded vehicle numbers increased from 879,544 in 1994 to 1.267 million in 1999. Average traffic growth was thus 7.6 per cent per annum over this period (at a time of significant economic growth), with individual rates of 8.5 per cent for cars, 5.5 per cent for minibuses, and 9.7 per cent for trucks. Since vehicles pay tolls (and are thus recorded) only in the westbound direction, the annual totals given above indicate average two-way daily flows of 4,819 in 1994 and 6,941 in 1999. Since 1999 traffic has continued to increase to approximately 8,000 vehicles per day in 2004, indicating further growth since 1999 at 2.9 per cent per annum (at a time of renewed economic stagnation).



It may be expected that traffic will continue to increase in future, possibly at between 3 and 7 per cent per annum depending upon overall economic performance. If a central forecast of 5 per cent annual growth is assumed, the two-way flows could reach 10,700 per day by 2010 and 13,700 per day by 2015. The present bridge should be capable of handling such flows, except that delays and congestion, especially at the eastern end, may be expected to increase at rush hours and at times of bridge closure. 5 Finance

Average annual revenues and expenditures recorded by DHBC over the period 2000-04 were as follows (in G$ million per annum):

Revenues: Vehicle tolls 177.93 Marine tolls 15.37 Other revenues 11.46 Total 204.76

Expenditures:

Salaries and administration 71.27 Structural maintenance 56.47 Traffic management 29.41 Other expenditures 42.68 Total 199.83

Net earnings thus averaged G$ 4.93 million per annum. Results year by year were as follows:

2000 20.91 2001 (51.20) 2002 36.30 2003 18.09 2004 0.55

Thus revenues scarcely cover operating expenditures including routine maintenance. Even in the period 2000-04, when the rehabilitation was only just completed, some more substantial maintenance costs had to be financed by government subvention. Subventions totalled G$ 133.64 million in the three years 2000-02, but were then not received in the following two years; reportedly a further subvention of G$ 35 million was in fact agreed for 2003, but then never paid to DHBC.



A key factor behind the marginal financial results has been the continued refusal of Government to entertain requests for a toll increase, despite ever rising costs. In an evaluation of the DHB Rehabilitation Project, performed for the EC Delegation by Setec in 2000/01, the Consultants made a form recommendation that the tolls for vehicles should be doubled, and those of ocean-going vessels increased by 100 times. This tariff revision was deemed necessary to ensure full coverage of maintenance and operating costs. It would not, however, be sufficient to cover full eventual bridge replacement costs. If continuing constraints on toll levels cause future deferment of desirable maintenance (as seems likely), then this will eventually cause accelerated deterioration of the structure. 6 Future Bridge Replacement

As indicated in the Introduction, it will in due course be necessary to consider future options when the bridge once again requires refurbishment. It seems that there may be good reasons, in the next few years, to seriously consider replacement of the floating structure by a fixed concrete bridge, an option which was not permitted in the evaluation of options in the early 1990s. As part of their Evaluation Study of 2001, Setec undertook a theoretical analysis on a 40-year time horizon, of a floating bridge and a fixed concrete bridge. This highlighted the very much higher maintenance costs which will be required for a floating structure. For the floating bridge the following assumptions were made: • initial cost of € 15.0 million in Year 1, • rehabilitation cost of € 8.5 million in Year 15, • replacement cost of € 15.0 million in Year 30, • maintenance costs of € 1.5 million in Year 2, and of € 2.0 million in each of the Years 3-39

(except Years 15 and 30). For the concrete bridge it was assumed that initial cost in Year 1 would be € 40.0 million, with annual maintenance costs of € 60,000 thereafter up to Year 39. SETEC calculated that total discounted costs at an assumed 10 per cent discount rate would be € 36.5 million for the floating bridge and € 40.6 million for the concrete bridge, giving a small advantage to the floating bridge. They noted also, however, that the floating bridge would suffer non-quantified disbenefits in respect of safety, rehabilitation and time savings. A crude calculation suggests that a detailed calculation of time savings for road vehicles and vessels should be at least of the order of € 0.5 million per annum, rising over the years in line with traffic. At the 10 per cent discount rate this would equate to around € 5.0 million over the



evaluation period, more than sufficient to reverse the balance of advantage from floating bridge to concrete bridge. Safety and reliability factors have not been included in this estimate, but would certainly be higher for the floating structure. It is likely also that a permanent concrete bridge would be preferable with respect to development impact on the Demerara West Bank. As an example a leading port operator informed the Consultants that, while a new container terminal on the West Bank could possibly be of interest to his organisation, it would be an impossibility without a new fixed bridge.



Working Paper 14: Urban / Suburban Minibus Services in Georgetown [Preparations for Special Study No. 1] Contents

1 General.................................................................................................................................... 1

2 Bus Survey Procedure ........................................................................................................... 3

3 Survey Results ........................................................................................................................ 5

4 Preliminary Conclusions ..................................................................................................... 28 Tables

Table 3-1: Minibus Survey in Stabroek Area, Georgetown ................................................. 6

Table 3-2: Minibus Survey in Stabroek Market Area, Georgetown..................................... 7

Figures

Figure 1-1: Location of Bus Terminals in Stabroek Market Area, Georgetown.................... 2



1 General

This draft Working Paper has been prepared as a component of the Preparation of Special Study No.1 (Traffic and Transport Development in Georgetown) and concentrates on an Investigation into the current development of urban and suburban minibus routes in Georgetown. All minibuses routes in Georgetown have their terminal near Stabroek Market. Those routes are: Urban routes:

• Route 40 to Kitty / Campbell Sophia • Route 41 to South Ruimveldt • Route 45 to Georgetown Public Hospital Other, non urban routes with a terminal at Stabroek are the following: • Route 31 to Wales • Route 32 to Parika (Essequibo River) • Route 42 to Timehri International Airport • Route 43 to Linden • Route 44 East Coast Demerara, to Mahaica (31 miles from Georgetown) • Route 50 to Berbice (express route, cannot drop passengers until Mahaica) Terminals are distributed as follows: Routes 40 and 45: on Croal Street, at the corner of Stabroek Market Place; Route 41: in front of the High Court building, on the Avenue of the Republic; Routes 31 and 32: at the corner of Cornhill Street and Brickdam Street; Route 42: at the corner of Cornhill Street and Hadfield Street; Route 43: at the corner of Cornhill Street and Hadfield Street; Route 44: on Hincks Street, between Commerce Street and Charlotte Street; Route 50: on Avenue of the Republic, at the corner with Commerce Street



Figure 1-1: Location of Bus Terminals in Stabroek Market Area, Georgetown

Demico

Parliament

City Hall

High Court

Stabroek Market Square

Hadfield Street

Brickdam Street

Croal Street

Charlotte Street

Regent Street

Commerce Street

Avenue of the Republic

50 44

41

40 45

43

42

31

32

41



2 Bus Survey Procedure

The purpose of the survey is to carry out a count of the vehicles, per route (the identification number of which is visible on the vehicle body), with the number of passenger seats they offer (number of seats is painted on the vehicle body as well, it can be 7, 10 or 13 passenger seats after discounting driver and conductor seats). At the same time, passengers boarding the minibus are counted. If possible, passengers alighted (disembarked) are counted as well. Vehicle plate numbers are noted for the only purpose of estimating the fleet actually operating and approximate duration of rotations, on each route. The survey form (see next page) shows one row per vehicle. Boxes are to be filled, in two columns of 50 rows each (a fully completed form allows the survey of 100 vehicles). The survey took place from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m., in three successive 5 hours shifts, during two successive week days: Monday 21 and Tuesday 22 March, 2005. During one shift, the survey team involves surveyors and a supervisor. The supervisor indicates the start of every period of a quarter of an hour; he keeps a reserve of survey forms to be distributed to the surveyors according to their needs, and envelopes to classify the forms during the shift. The envelopes will indicate: date, routes surveyed, shift (shift 1 from 6 to 11 a.m., shift 2 from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m., or shift 3 from 4 to 9 p.m.), name of supervisor, names of the surveyors. The supervisor should replace a surveyor whenever it appears to be necessary. The survey took place at the seven terminals mentioned above, all of them in the Stabroek Market area. Survey staff was organized as follows: 1) Routes 40 and 45: 2 surveyors and 1 supervisor (also supervising route 41 surveyors);

2) Route 41: 2 surveyors (there are two different exits for this route);

3) Routes 31 and 32: 2 surveyors and 1 supervisor (also supervising route 42 and Route 43 surveyors);

4) Route 42: 1 surveyor

5) Route 43: 1 surveyor;

6) Route 44: 1 surveyor and 1 supervisor (also supervising route 50 surveyor);

7) Route 50: 1 surveyor.

Total staff per five hours shifts involves 13 people. Next page, a sample of the survey form.



Time Route plate no. seats disembarked boarded Time Route plate no. seats disembarked boarded

MINISTRY OF PUBLIC WORKS AND COMMUNICATIONS

Minibus survey around Stabroek Market in Georgetown

passengers passengersvehicle vehicle



3 Survey Results

Survey results are shown in the tables in the pages hereafter. The number of vehicles actually plying on a route (“operating fleet”) varies considerably from one day to the next. On some routes they were quite more numerous on Tuesday than on Monday, but on other routes (particularly on route 43 to Linden) they were less numerous on Tuesday. It is normal, however, that quantities of services and passengers boarded be different on Monday and Tuesday, since Monday is the first day of the week and trip patterns may be somehow different after the week-end. The most interesting observation is that more than half the vehicles are seen only once or twice during the day, even though they ply on Georgetown urban routes, where some vehicles have been observed providing up to 14 round trips during the period from 6 a.m. to 9 p.m.. Many minibuses are clearly used for other purposes than plying their allocated route, or are not used at all, during most of the day. It may even mean that the driver and conductor have another job which is actually their main job. For each route and for each day is given a table, a graph (histograms of seats offered and passengers boarded at the terminal, per hour), and how many vehicles (identified by their plate number) have done 1, 2, 3, etc. rotations during the survey period (normally during 15 consecutive hours). For route 43 (Georgetown to Linden), it has also been possible to give some results on buses arriving and passengers alighted (disembarked) at the terminal. It shows a comparatively strong peak hour for arrivals, between 9 and 10 a.m. ‘Departures’ means the number of times minibuses have left their terminal.

‘Vehicles’ means the number of different minibuses having left their terminal.

‘Seats offered’ concerns passenger seats only, driver and conductor seats having been discounted.

‘Boarded pax’ is the number of passengers having boarded a minibus and left the terminal. Three peak hours are identified: morning, noon and afternoon. A tendency to overload the vehicles (more passengers than the licensed capacity of the vehicles) is observed at afternoon peak period on several routes.


Table 3-1: Minibus Survey in Stabroek Area, Georgetown MINIBUS SURVEY IN STABROEK AREA, GEORGETOWN

Peak hours and boarded passengers

No. Destination peak a.m. boarded peak noon boarded peak p.m. boarded peak a.m. boarded peak noon boarded peak p.m. boarded31 Wales 7-8 53 11-12 195 17-18 400 10-11 89 12-13 162 17-18 39132 Parika 7-8 238 13-14 192 18-19 331 8-9 253 13-14 199 18-19 31240* Kitty/Sophia 10-11 868 12-13 753 17-18 893 8-9 1006 12-13 1227 17-18 143441* South Ruimweldt 8-9 1480 12-13 1664 15-16 1289 9-10 1119 12-13 1726 15-16 255542 Timehri 8-9 638 13-14 1042 17-18 1631 8-9 765 12-13 709 17-18 185443 Linden 8-9 56 13-14 117 17-18 121 9-10 88 13-14 84 16-17 14644 East Coast Demerara 8-9 304 12-13 1070 17-18 1143 9-10 340 13-14 808 16-17 96545* G'town Public Hospital 8-9 1624 8-9 665 12-13 652 18-19 70350 Berbice River 8-9 121 12-13 123 17-18 159 7-8 26 12-13 129 15-16 14263 New Amsterdam 12-13 26 15-16 52

Bus fleet actually operating

No. Destination on 21/03 on 22/0331 Wales 74 7132 Parika 165 15840* Kitty/Sophia 271 39641* South Ruimweldt 453 63342 Timehri 399 50443 Linden 70 2444 East Coast Demerara 199 25845* G'town Public Hospital 195 26850 Berbice River 53 8763 New Amsterdam 26 * : urban route

Bus route

Bus route

Monday 21 March, 2005 Tuesday 22 March, 2005

Operating fleet



Table 3-2: Minibus Survey in Stabroek Market Area, Georgetown

Day: Monday 21 March 2005

Route no. : 31 Wales Fleet:

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6-7 8 8 104 512 7-8 4 4 52 533 8-9 3 3 39 244 9-10 4 4 39 365 10-11 7 7 91 856 11-12 15 15 195 1957 12-13 11 11 143 1478 13-14 14 14 182 1789 14-15 10 10 130 11610 15-16 15 15 195 22211 16 -17 15 15 195 20312 17-18 28 28 364 40013 18-19 18 18 234 27114 19-20 8 8 104 12215 20-21 6 6 78 77

Totals 166 2145 2180

31 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s)9 " 2 "8 " 3 "

13 " 4 "4 " 5 "4 " 6 "4 " 7 "1 " 8 "

MINIBUS SURVEY IN STABROEK MARKET AREA, GEORGETOWN

74 vehicles of 13 seats

050

100150200250300350400450

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period

Seats offeredBoarded pax



Day: Tuesday 22 March 2005

Route no. : 31 Wales Fleet:

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6-7 9 9 117 482 7-8 15 15 195 633 8-9 6 6 78 544 9-10 8 8 104 755 10-11 8 8 104 896 11-12 5 5 65 647 12-13 11 11 143 1628 13-14 14 14 182 1449 14-15 7 7 91 100

10 15-16 9 9 117 12411 16 -17 20 20 260 28612 17-18 26 26 338 39113 18-19 16 16 208 23714 19-20 9 9 117 12715 20-21 5 5 65 64

Totals 168 2184 2028

31 vehicles did 1 rotation (s)9 " 2 "7 " 3 "9 " 4 "4 " 5 "6 " 6 "2 " 7 "2 " 9 "1 " 11 "



050

100150200250300350400450

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 32 Parika Fleet:


10 15-16 14 14 182 19711 16 -17 13 13 184 19812 17-18 24 24 312 30213 18-19 24 24 327 33114 19-20 20 20 260 26815 20-21 15 15 195 207

Totals 239 3137 3096

102 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s)42 " 2 "9 " 3 "9 " 4 "2 " 5 "1 " 6 "



0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 32 Parika Fleet:


10 15-16 9 9 117 13011 16 -17 25 25 340 30112 17-18 19 19 247 22613 18-19 22 22 301 31214 19-20 16 16 208 22615 20-21 6 6 93 101

Totals 216 2879 2680



157 vehicles of 13 seats 1 vehicle of 28 seats

050

100150200250300350400

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 40 Kitty Fleet:Sophia

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6:15 - 7 31 29 403 972 7-8 55 51 715 3213 8-9 69 65 897 5754 9-10 77 69 1001 7065 10-11 89 81 1157 8686 11-12 95 88 1235 6547 12-13 143 117 1859 7538 13-14 127 106 1651 7189 14-15 135 107 1755 844

10 15-16 108 101 1404 63411 16:15 - 17 66 858 88412 17-18 76 988 89313 18-19 56 728 85614 19-20 27 351 35015 20-21 25 325 320

Totals 1179 15327 9473

116 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s) from 6:15 to 16:0019 " 2 " "16 " 3 " "32 " 4 " "24 " 5 " "24 " 6 " "15 " 7 " "12 " 8 " "

6 " 9 " "3 " 10 " "2 " 11 " "0 " 12 " "1 " 13 " "1 " 14 " "


271vehicles of 13 seatsfrom 6:15 to 16:00

0200400600800

100012001400160018002000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 40 Kitty Fleet:Sophia

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6:30 - 7 46 45 598 402 7-8 180 134 2340 7793 8-9 180 141 2340 10064 9-10 158 134 2054 8175 10-11 116 106 1508 5416 11-12 153 126 1989 9717 12-13 143 123 1859 12278 13-14 117 103 1521 7319 14-15 140 115 1820 77310 15-16 146 122 1898 131911 16 -17 64 832 83712 17-18 126 1638 143413 18-19 74 962 70314 19-20 44 572 49915 20-21 59 767 564

Totals 1746 22698 12241

208 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s) from 6:30 to 16:0026 " 2 " "13 " 3 " "27 " 4 " "24 " 5 " "21 " 6 " "19 " 7 " "11 " 8 " "14 " 9 " "8 " 10 " "

14 " 11 " "7 " 12 " "1 " 13 " "3 " 14 " "



0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 41, South Ruimweldt Fleet:

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6:15 - 7 23 21 299 1282 7-8 108 88 1392 5213 8-9 239 146 2963 14804 9-10 197 132 2474 12685 10-11 155 105 1976 10406 11-12 112 83 1438 9997 12-13 148 122 1846 16648 13-149 14-15 46 39 595 60510 15-16 97 77 1234 128911 16 -17 71 51 923 90412 17-18 83 70 1079 94913 18-19 68 64 884 82314 19-20 74 67 962 88715 20-21 64 61 832 815

Totals 1485 18897 13372

13 seats veh.: 430269 vehicle(s) did 1 or 2 rotation (s)37 " 3 or 4 "33 " 5 or 6 "41 " 7 or 8 "22 " 9 or 10 "13 " 11 or 12 "9 " 13 or 14 "6 " 15 to 18 "

10 seats veh.: 2317 vehicle(s) did 1 or 2 rotation (s)1 " 3 "2 " 8 or 9 "3 " 15 to 18 "


430 vehicles of 13 seats23 vehicles of 10 seats

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 41, South Ruimweldt Fleet:

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6:15 - 7 55 52 700 2142 7-8 155 112 1973 6893 8-9 147 124 1854 11124 9-10 163 131 2059 11195 10-11 122 102 1514 9656 11-12 129 105 1602 9417 12-13 167 111 2066 17268 13-14 150 99 1845 14109 14-15 138 96 1722 119510 15-16 209 155 2585 255511 16 -17 102 99 1269 156212 17-18 76 74 913 112713 18-19 124 111 1528 157214 19-20 78 77 957 91515 20-21 72 64 900 827

Totals 1887 23487 17929

13 seats veh.: 528370 vehicle(s) did 1 or 2 rotation (s)44 " 3 or 4 "40 " 5 or 6 "29 " 7 or 8 "20 " 9 or 10 "15 " 11 or 12 "7 " 13 or 14 "3 " 15 "

10 seats veh.: 10569 vehicle(s) did 1 or 2 rotation (s)9 " 3 or 4 "5 " 5 or 6 "

11 " 7 or 8 "5 " 9 or 10 "3 " 11 or 12 "2 " 13 or 14 "1 " 18 "



0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 42 Timehri Fleet:


Totals 1040 13517 12678


6 " 7 "7 " 8 "4 " 9 "3 " 10 "2 " 11 "1 " 12 "2 " 13 "


399vehicles of 13 seats

0200400600800

10001200140016001800

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 42 Timehri Fleet:


10 15-16 21 21 273 31711 16 -17 97 97 1261 132312 17-18 132 132 1716 185413 18-19 83 83 1079 120814 19-20 61 61 793 77215 20-21 26 26 338 319

Totals 967 12571 11196

292 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s)75 " 2 "45 " 3 "44 " 4 "19 " 5 "9 " 6 "4 " 7 "5 " 8 "4 " 9 "3 " 10 "1 " 11 "3 " 12 "



0200400600800

100012001400160018002000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 43 Linden Fleet:no conductors on this route

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6-7 2 2 28 282 7-8 1 1 14 143 8-9 4 4 56 564 9-10 3 3 42 425 10-11 4 4 56 606 11-12 3 3 42 297 12-13 6 6 98 948 13-14 9 9 140 1179 14-15 9 9 154 11410 15-16 8 8 126 9511 16 -17 6 6 98 9612 17-18 7 7 112 12113 18-19 6 6 98 10614 19-20 4 4 56 5515 20-21 6 6 84 85

Totals 78 1204 1112

42 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s)16 " 2 "10 " 3 "2 " 4 "

Note: all 28 seaters were seen only once



020406080

100120140160180

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period






# Time period Arrivals Vehicles Seats offered ALIGHTED1 6-7 2 2 28 222 7-8 5 5 70 663 8-9 9 9 126 1024 9-10 11 11 154 1355 10-11 6 6 84 706 11-12 1 1 14 147 12-138 13-149 14-1510 15-1611 16 -1712 17-1813 18-1914 19-2015 20-21

Totals 34 476 409

Note: This sheet shows vehicles arriving and passengers alighted (disembarked)



020406080

100120140160180

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period

Seats offeredALIGHTED






10 15-16 5 5 70 7011 16 -17 10 10 140 14612 17-18 7 7 98 12313 18-19 6 6 98 9414 19-20 2 2 28 2815 20-21 1 1 14 14

Totals 62 882 901

13 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s)5 " 2 "3 " 3 "2 " 4 "1 " 5 "



020406080

100120140160

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period






# Time period Arrivals Vehicles Seats offered ALIGHTED1 6-7 2 2 28 222 7-8 3 3 56 533 8-9 1 1 28 254 9-10 1 1 28 295 10-11 0 0 0 06 11-12 5 5 70 527 12-13 6 6 84 648 13-14 4 4 56 529 14-15 3 3 42 37

10 15-16 1 1 14 1211 16 -1712 17-1813 18-1914 19-2015 20-21

Totals 26 406 346

Note: This sheet shows vehicles arriving and passengers alighted (disembarked)



0102030405060708090

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period

Seats offeredALIGHTED




Route no. : 44, East Coast Demerara Fleet:

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6-72 7-83 8-9 34 442 3044 9-10 26 338 2695 10-11 39 507 4586 11-12 83 1079 9737 12-13 94 1222 10708 13-14 76 988 9379 14-15 68 884 897

10 15-16 73 949 104511 16 -17 81 77 1053 96812 17-18 91 85 1183 114313 18-19 74 70 962 92914 19-20 48 47 624 61115 20-21 26 25 338 343

Totals 813 10569 9947

115 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s) from 16:00 to 21:0057 " 2 " "19 " 3 " "7 " 4 " "1 " 5 " "



from 16:00 and 21:00

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 44, East Coast Demerara Fleet:

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6-7 86 77 1118 1792 7-8 113 103 1469 2753 8-9 71 69 923 2794 9-10 77 74 1001 3405 10-11 48 47 624 2896 11-12 43 559 5077 12-13 59 767 6968 13-14 65 845 8089 14-15 58 754 71910 15-16 67 871 84711 16 -17 80 76 1040 96512 17-18 77 73 1001 89513 18-19 55 53 715 63914 19-20 38 37 494 43415 20-21 32 32 416 370

Totals 969 12597 8242

176 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s) from 6:00 to 11:0047 " 2 " "25 " 3 " "

4 " 4 " "5 " 5 " "1 " 6 " "



between 6:00 and 11:00

0200400600800

1000120014001600

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 45, G'town Public Hospital Fleet:

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6:30 - 7 14 12 182 1022 7-8 60 40 780 7193 8-9 116 72 1508 16244 9-10 109 72 1417 14375 10-11 73 56 949 5536 11-12 74 60 962 3687 12-13 130 70 1690 4178 13-149 14-1510 15-1611 16 -17 28 26 364 27812 17-18 25 24 325 26313 18-19 22 20 286 21014 19-20 19 19 247 14615 20-21 19 18 247 154

Totals 689 8957 6271

110 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s) from 6:30 to 13:009 " 2 " and 16:00 to 21:004 " 3 "1 " 4 "3 " 5 "4 " 6 "

10 " 7 "3 " 8 "8 " 9 "9 " 10 "

11 " 11 "7 " 12 "6 " 13 "1 " 14 "1 " 15 "4 " 16 "2 " 17 "2 " 18 "



0200400600800

10001200140016001800

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 45, G'town Public Hospital Fleet:

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6-7 45 29 585 152 7-8 139 79 1807 6563 8-9 109 82 1417 6654 9-10 112 80 1469 6745 10-11 117 75 1521 4086 11:20 - 12 73 70 949 3597 12-13 115 67 1495 6528 13-14 94 56 1222 4569 14-15 81 58 1053 32510 15-16 79 60 1027 41411 16 -17 60 47 780 50912 17-18 48 45 624 52113 18-19 83 44 1079 70314 19-20 34 21 442 35915 20-21 22 13 286 170

Totals 1211 15756 6886


12 " 4 "8 " 5 "

21 " 6 "18 " 7 "17 " 8 "16 " 9 "13 " 10 "14 " 11 "4 " 12 "3 " 13 "4 " 14 "



0200400600800

100012001400160018002000

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 50 Berbice Fleet:

# Time period Departures Vehicles Seats offered Boarded pax1 6:30 - 7 2 2 26 132 7-8 5 5 65 133 8-9 21 21 273 1214 9-10 22 22 286 575 10-11 15 15 195 756 11-12 10 10 130 537 12-13 15 15 195 1238 13-14 13 13 169 1219 14-15 10 10 130 8910 15-16 10 10 130 12211 16 -17 10 10 130 12112 17-18 15 15 195 15913 18-19 5 5 65 5114 19 - 19:30 2 2 26 1315 20-21

Totals 155 2015 1131

49 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s) from 11:00 to 16:004 " 2 " "



0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 50 Berbice Fleet:


Totals 109 1417 998




020406080

100120140160

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period





Route no. : 63, New Amsterdam Fleet: Moleson Creek


Totals 26 338 213

25 vehicle(s) did 1 rotation (s)1 " 2 "



0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Time period




4 Preliminary Conclusions

All urban and suburban minibus routes in Georgetown have their terminal in Stabroek Market area, in the downtown area between the City Hall and Demerara River. The high quantity of vehicles, including minibuses and taxis which also have terminals in the same area, the elevated flows of pedestrians (including boarding or alighting passengers), creates a disorderly jam on the streets all day long, and particularly during the morning and afternoon peak hours. Non-urban routes should have their terminal in an organized, off-street area properly conditioned with controlled accesses, platforms, shields and lighting, located in the outskirts of the City, not in the downtown area. Urban routes should serve the inter-urban terminal by having stops along the sidewalks limiting the contours of the interurban bus terminal, with the same approach for taxis. Once the interurban routes have been pulled out from Stabroek Market area, it will be possible to organize the urban routes terminals in an orderly fashion. These are three urban routes at present (#40 to Kitty Campbell and Sophia, #41 to South Ruimveldt, #45 to Georgetown Public Hospital) but new routes could be created to better serve Georgetown. A detailed study should be carried out in close co-operation with the Traffic Police, to design a more extensive bus network. The size of vehicles should be increased; the bus capacity should not be less than 28 passenger seats, in any case. The GOPA survey shows that route 40 offers up to 180 departures per hour (or one every 20 seconds), route 41: up to 239 (or one every 15 seconds), route 45: up to 139 (or one every 26 seconds). Such frequencies are, frankly, absurd and only create disorder, a huge park demand and severe traffic jams. The larger the vehicles, the smaller would be the fleet present at the same time in the downtown terminal area, and the more orderly the bus stops and traffic at intersections would be. Raising the minimum size of buses should probably eliminate vehicles making only one or two daily trips and then disappearing from public transport activity for the rest of the day; a large vehicle can only be made profitable if it operates all day long. In the next stage of the Special Study No. 1 the preliminary findings will be cross-referenced with the comprehensive findings of the Public Transport Study Report (N.D. Lea September 2003), in order that a comprehensive view of the strategy and policy objectives can be formed, prior to drawing up a detailed ToR for an integrated Multi-sectoral Transport Study for Georgetown.

Documents

Urban Transportation