upepo
Elder Lister
In most developed countries, urban commuter rail systems play a central role in ferrying passengers in and out of cities. Although such cities have bus transport as well, the rail systems are the primary mode of transport for people entering and leaving cities. This means that rail commuter transport in cities is a proven idea.
As would be expected, therefore, every time the traffic congestion issue in Nairobi comes up, the existing rail network is fronted as a viable solution. However, all initiatives to use the railway as a mass commuter transporter have ended up in failure. The actual passenger numbers ferried by rail are a small fraction of the expected figures and, therefore, commuter rail transport ends up having little impact on city traffic. On paper, the Nairobi commuter rail network has the potential to ferry 500,000 passengers daily, but it hardly makes 10,000 passengers. This despite the huge investments involved. For perspective, the daily commuter numbers in and out of the city are estimated at between 1 million and 2 million.
There are a number of interesting observations regarding the Nairobi commuter rail service. One, the trains run one or two trips during peak hours (morning and evening) and remain idle for the rest of the day. This could mean they operate at a loss or depend on subsidies or overcharge their customers. Even though people commute to and from the city throughout the day, the commuter rail has been unable to capture this market. It is also noticeable that the trains are usually filled to the roof, which means that they do not exhaust the existing demand during peak hours. These observations raise an important question; why does the Nairobi commuter rail fail despite the apparent potential? This is the question I will try to address next.
In the past, various challenges have been linked to the poor performance of the rail commuter service, and efforts have been made to address these. For instance, the operator has bought more coaches, built stations and car parks for motorists, improved the condition of the rail and all that. But still, the rail commuter service has failed to reach the desired impact in terms of decongesting city traffic. Although the challenges were real, they seem not to be the reason behind the poor performance since little changed even after they were eliminated.
The persisting poor performance leads to the speculation that the problem lies elsewhere. A leading contender here is the possibility that the commuter rail network suffers from a poor fit with the city layout. Here is some more explanation. When cities develop commuter rails, they ensure that the infrastructure aligns with residential areas and the road network. In other words, the infrastructure is built around commuter needs. This way, the other means of passenger transport, buses for example, complement the rail system and vice versa. This alignment seems to be missing in the Nairobi commuter rail. The Nairobi commuter rail looks like an attempt to repurpose a piece of rail infrastructure that aligns poorly with residential areas, the existing road network, commuter needs, and the travel habits of city residents. When a commuter transport network scores poorly on these key aspects, no amount of investment would make it work. So, what is the solution?
The solution is simple. The commuter rail has to align with residential areas, the existing road network, commuter needs, and the travel habits of city residents. But, how do we achieve this given that shifting the rail network or residential areas is impractical? Simple – make the rail network a comprehensive commuter transport corridor as opposed to a stand alone rail system. Given that the railway line has enough space on both sides (30 metres each side), it is possible to incorporate additional transport infrastructure such as tarmacked roads, bicycle lanes, and pedestrian walkways. This additional infrastructure would encourage public transport to link the rail corridor with residential areas, forming commuter tributaries that ferry passengers to and from the corridor.
In addition, the railway operator could also use its own buses to operate a rapid bus transport services to cater for travelers in between schedules or even take the surplus commuters during peak times. Such comprehensive corridors could be easily equipped to support commuter services for 18 hours and would go a long way to alleviate congestion on the road network. Finally, it would encourage the growth of new residential areas away from the existing road network. Overall, it would decongest city roads and residential areas while providing reliable, affordable, and decent commuter services for city residents.
Below is a sketch of what the commuter transport corridor might look like.
Last edited: