SERVICE LEVEL BENCHMARK IN URBAN TRANSPORT By Megha Gupta, Urban Transport Planner, IUT

Transcription

1 SERVICE LEVEL BENCHMARK IN URBAN TRANSPORT By Megha Gupta, Urban Transport Planner, IUT 1

2 Present Scenario Indian Cities 1. Cities are Sprawling 2. Environmental Degradation 3. Declining PT & NMT 4. Low Investments 5. Supply Side Focus 6. Poor Enforcement 7. Multiple Institutions 8. Poor Traffic Sense in People From 2001 to 2011, the annual growth of population 1.6%, but motor vehicles increased by almost 10% Focus on improving mobility for car users 2

3 Challenges of our cities Limited right of way No footpaths Heterogeneity of vehicles Very limited public transport Lack of trained manpower Inadequate resources 3

4 Need for Improved Mobility 1. Improved economic potential of the city 2. Improved Quality of Life 3. Livable Cities 4

5 Aim to provide affordable, accessible, equitable, comfortable, secure, and environment-friendly transport services. Sustainable Urban Transport Manage Demand Manage Supply 5

6 Major components of sustainable transport Promoting Public Transport Land Use Transport Integration Priority to NMT Environment Safety Freight Traffic Management Parking Management 6

7 Need to benchmark components of Sustainable urban transport 7

8 Definition & Objectives A measurement of the quality of facilities in urban transport and its comparison with the standards with respect to the facility. The objectives of benchmarking are: 1. To determine what and where improvements are required 2. To analyze how to achieve high performance levels 3. To use this information to improve performance 8

9 Benefits Help GoI in ensuring optimum allocation of resources and their utilization by the cities. Help to assess the impact of investment made in UT SLB Help in identifying general short comings in infrastructure and service delivery State/City authority can use to set and track their performance improvement Guide in formulating a general policy for future interventions and investment requirements in UT 10

10 10. Financial Sustainability of PT by Bus 1. Public Transport facilities 2. Pedestrian Infrastructure facilities 9. Integrated Land Use Transport System 8. Pollution levels 10 Benchmarks Areas of Interventions 3. NMT facilities 4. Level of Usage of ITS facilities 7. Road Safety 6. Availability of Parking Spaces 5. Travel speed along major corridors 11

11 Cycle tracks of Jaipur Pedestrian facilities - Jammu Median on roads- Jammu Indicators of Benchmarking 13 Railway Station- Katra

12 1. Public Transport Facilities Presence of Organised Public Transport System in Urban Area Extent of Supply Availability of public Transport Service Coverage of Public Transport in the city Average waiting time for Public Transport users Level of Comfort in Public Transport % of Fleet as per Urban Bus Specifications 14

13 2. Pedestrian Infrastructure facilities % of City Covered with footpaths (wider than 1.2m.) Signalised Intersection Delay Street Lighting (Lux) 3. Non-Motorized Transport % of network covered Encroachment on NMT roads by Vehicle Parking NMT Parking facilities at Interchange 15

14 4. Level of Usage of Intelligent Transport System (ITS) facilities Availability of Traffic Surveillance Global Positioning System (GPS) / General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) Passenger Information System (PIS) Integrated Ticketing System Signal Synchronization 16

15 5. Travel speed (Motorized and Mass Transit) along major corridors Average Travel speed of Personal vehicles Average Travel speed of Public transport 6. Availability of Parking Spaces Availability of on street paid public parking spaces Ratio of Maximum and Minimum Parking Fee in the City 17

16 7. Road Safety Fatality rate per lakh population Fatality rate for pedestrian and NMT 8. Pollution levels SO2 Oxides of Nitrogen SPM RSPM (Size less than 10 microns) 18

17 9. Integrated Land Use Transport System Population Density Gross Intensity of development along transit corridor Mixed Land-use on Major Transit Corridors / Network Road Netwrok Pattern and Completeness of the network Intensity of Development City wide (FSI) % of area under Roads % age network having exclusive ROW for Transit network 19

18 10. Financial Sustainability of Public Transport (Bus) Extent of Non fare Revenue Staff /bus ratio Operating Ratio 20

19 Stakeholder Consultation at all stages Methodology Collection of Primary and Secondary data Detailed analysis of data Establishment of LOS for indicators under each benchmark Annual Monitoring Compilation of Report card Calculation of overall LOS 21

20 Following Steps are involved: 1. Study Area Delineation Marking the administrative units of city limits like municipal corporation or continuous development area etc. Marking the public transport routes covering the urban and sub-urban network. Preparation of base maps in GIS /VISSUM software 22 JMC Limits Sq. Km

21 2. Data Collection - Secondary Data Sl. No. Data Development Authority Municipal Corporation STU/ SPV RTO Traffic Police PCB 1 Area and population 2 Road Network Characteristics 3 Public Transport Characteristics 4 Pedestrian facilitates 5 Non Motorized transport 6 Parking locations and fee Intelligent Transport System 7 facilities 8 Intermediate Public Transport 9 Road Safety 10 Pollution Integrated land use transport 12 Financial Sustainability

22 2. Data Collection Primary Data through Surveys Sl. No. Service level benchmarks Primary surveys Boarding Alighting Survey 1 Public Transport Characteristics 2 Pedestrian facilitates 3 Non Motorized transport 4 Parking locations and fee Intelligent Transport System 5 Bus Stop Headway Count Survey Bus Occupancy Survey Road inventory survey -Availability of footpaths -Encroachment on foot paths -Lux Survey Bicycle parking survey at Interchanges --Availability of cycle parking facility within 250m radius of at major bus stops/ Terminals Road inventory Survey -Parking provision in the city Intersection Survey & Interchange Survey 24

23 2. Data Collection : A. Primary Sl. No. Service level benchmarks Primary surveys 6 Travel speed along major corridors Speed and Delay survey along major arterials -Travel speed of personal vehicles and public transport along Arterial roads 7 Road Safety Not required 8 Pollution Not required 9 Integrated land use transport Land use and Intensity of development survey along Proposed PT corridor Mixed land use zoning (% area under non residential use) 10 Financial Sustainability Not required 25

24 C. Sampling S. No. Primary Survey 1 Road network details along the Arterial roads / Sub arterial roads / Key public transport corridors Cities with < 1 million Population Cities with 1-4 million Population Cities with > 4 million Population 100% 60-70% 20-25% 2 Passenger count on identified 100% 70-80% 25-35% routes 3 Headway count at identified major bus stops All Bus Stops 25% 10% 4 Phasing plan of signalized intersections along the identified Roads 5 Lighting on footpaths along along identified roads (Lux) 6 Measurement of encroachment on NMT network All signalized intersection 70-80% 50-60% 100% 60-70% 20-25% 100% 70-80% 20-25% 26

25 C. Sampling S. No. Primary Survey Cities with < 1 million Population Cities with 1-4 million Population Cities with > 4 million Population 7 Identification of NMT facilities at Interchanges and Bus stops All Interchanges and terminals 25% 10% 8 PIS/CCTV at major bus stops, terminals, signalized intersections and metro stations 100% of all interchanges 60-70% of all interchanges 20-25% of all the all interchanges 9 Speed delay along the identified roads 10 Speed delay the identified roads 11 On street parking along the identified roads 12 Land Use Observation Survey along identified corridors 100% 60-70% 20-25% 100% 60-70% 25-35% 100% 60-70% 20-25% 100% 60-70% 25-35% 27

26 3. Detailed Analysis of Data A. Preliminary data analysis B. Calculation of Level of Services (LoS) % of footpaths present in Jaipur Travel speed along PT corridors -Vijayawada C. Preparation of Report Card 4. Monitoring of LoS A. Annual monitoring of level of services Report card preparation 5. Stakeholders Consultation -All stages 28

27 Case Study - Jaipur 29

28 1. Public Transport Facilities L1 Presence of Organized Public Transport System in Urban Area (%) L2 Availability of Public Transport L3 Service Coverage of Public Transport in the City L4 Average Waiting Time for Public Transport Users L5 Level of Comfort in Public Transport L6 % of Fleet as per Urban Bus Specifications Calculated LoS = L1 + L2 + L3 + L4 + L5 + L6 30

29 1. Public Transport Facilities A. Organized Public Transport System In Urban Area B. Availability of Public Transport Parameter Input Source Total Number of Buses in the City 2288 RTO Total Number of Buses Under the ownership of STU/SPV 300 JCTSL Presence of Public Transport System in Urban Area(%) Parameter Input Source Number of Buses operating in a city on any day Total Population of the City Availability of 13.11% {b/a}*100 Public transport 0.08 /1000 population ,73,350 [a / b] JCTSL Census (2011) LOS Presence of organized Public Transport System in Urban Area 1 >= <20 Calculation LOS 13.11% 4 LOS Availability of Public Transport ( 000 population) 1 >= <0.2 Calculation LOS

30 1. Public Transport Facilities C. Service Coverage of Public Transport in the city Parameter Input Source Total length in road Kms of the corridors on which public transport system ply in the city Area of the Urban limits of the city in Sq. Km. 255 KMS Service Coverage [a / b] JCTSL Master Plan, / = 0.62 LOS Service Coverage of Public Transport in the city 1 >= <0.3 Calculation LOS

31 1. Public Transport Facilities D. Average waiting time for public transport users Avg. waiting time for each route during Peak Hr.: - By sorting route name, time, bus stop and direction Formatted Data for the Analysis STOP NAME DIRECTION transport transpor nagar to ghat t nagar ki ghunee transport transpor nagar to ghat t nagar ki ghunee PEAK TIME ROUTE NO am 8:34:00 15 am 8:34:00 6 ROUTE NAME mali khoti to todi mod harmada mod jagat pura(kachi basti) to gandhi nagar VIA BUS TYPE AC/ NAC 1 NAC 1 NAC LOS 4. Average Waiting Time for Public Transport Users (Minutes) 1 <= >10 Bus stops having frequency of 5mins 34 sec Source Calculation LOS Primary Survey 5 mins 34 sec 2 Primary Survey Required: Headway count survey at identified bus stops Secondary Data- STU/SPV,Transport department, private operators if available. for list of bus stops in city 33

32 1. Public Transport Facilities E. Level of Comfort in Public Transport Mapping of each PT corridor on GIS platform Primary Survey Required: Passenger Count Survey inside buses along identified routes Secondary Data- STU/SPV,Transport department, private operators if available. for list of all public transit routes Bus Occupancy Survey on 23 Bus Routes Formatting Data for Analysis Level of comfort of PT for peak hour : - Passengers on board/available seats; calculated at each bus stop for each route. LOS Level of Comfort in Public Transport 1 <= >2.5 Level of Comfort in Public Transport is 1.34 Calculation LOS

33 1. Public Transport Facilities F. % of Fleet as per Urban Bus Specification LOS Parameter Input Source Total Number of Buses in City Total Number of Buses as per Urban Bus Specifications % of Fleet as per Urban Bus Specifications % of Fleet as per Urban Bus Specification <= RTO 300 Calculate= [b / a] * 100 JCTCL, Primary Survey % of Fleet as per Urban Bus Specifications is 13.11% Calculation LOS 13.11% 4 35

34 Overall LoS - Public Transport Facilities Overal l LoS Calculate d LoS 1 < 12 Overall LoS= L1+L2+L3+L4+L5+L6= = 18 Comments The City has a good public transport system which is wide spread and easily available to the citizens. The system provided is comfortable The City has public transport system which may need considerable improvements in terms of supply of buses/ coaches and coverage as many parts of the city are not served by it. The frequency of the services available may need improvements. The system provided is comfortable The City has a public transport system which may need considerable improvements in terms of supply of buses / coaches and coverage as most parts of the city are not served by it. The frequency of the services available needs improvements. The system provided is not comfortable as there is considerable over loading The city has very poor/no organized public transport system 36 Over all LoS = 3

35 S. No. Service Level Benchmark LoS Actually Achieved LoS Targeted for Next Year Preparation of Report Card S. No. Service Level Non Motorized Benchmark S. No. 3 Transport Service Level Availability of 6 (NMT)facilities Benchmark Parking Spaces 91 4 Integrated Public Transport Land Use Level of usage of Transport facilities System Integrated Transport System (ITS) facilities LoS Actually LoS Targeted Achieved for Next Year LoS Actually 4 LoS Targeted 3 Achieved 4 for Next 3 Year Road Safety 4 3 Financial 10 Sustainability of 3 2 Public Travel Pedestrian speed Transport (Motorized and 52 Infrastructure 23 2 Mass facilities Transit) along major corridors 8 Pollution levels 3 2 Action Plan to Achieve the Target Control Construct dedicated NMT track along Action growth Plan in to parking Achieve demand. the Target This could major be done arterial/ by: sub-arterial roads - at least Action 75 Plan km. to Achieve the Target Improve Construct Introducing the extent NMT paid parking of parking supply spaces in and walled on service at city, coverage Ensure least around 25 of planning bus public interchanges stand transport. and and regulations other This could along be done key Develop commercial by: public the transit area strategy corridors to integrate encourage the planned Incremental provision parking of charges mixed Procuring land 250 use, and 350 higher standard CCTVs density for buses police Reduce development. surveillance, road fatalities. etc. to This manage can be urban done (as per Urban Bus Specification). by: Construct traffic Subsequently, at key dedicated locations increase public as frequency well. transport and network Add Identify public CCTVs transport black-spots. at in least buses service 50 Also km 2 per coverage assess bus. the The Central reasons public transport control for these room system accidents to be needs setup, to more financially connected Introducing Construct sustainable. footpath to traffic GPS in calming This (width buses. could =>1.8m) measures be done in by: Improve accident along the major peak prone arterial/ hour areas traffic sub-arterial e.g. flow speed at key locations, humps, roads e.g. - at chicanes, least around 80 curb the km. railway extensions, station Identifying alternative revenue and living Installing walled streets, city. pedestrian generation sources, etc. signals on at least e.g. advertising This and Enforcement 25 could signalized land be value done intersections of capture. by: traffic regulations Encourage Introduction Street lights should and of incentivise clean be fuel installed (e.g.: in all its usage in Compressed major Traffic arterial/ management Natural sub-arterial Gas) measures for roads, PT such and to as the low occupancy corridors on-street IPT improve vehicles. the parking lux levels control, along etc. the Synchronising Increasing footpath the signals share of for public better traffic flow transport for the and peak NMT movement. 37

36 MoUD Initiative MoUD has undertaken the research study on SLB in 12 cities as follows: Delhi, Jaipur, Nanded, Vijayawada, Jammu-Katra, & Patna - IUT Hubli-Dharwad, Mysore, Ahmadabad, Surat, Kohima & Bhubaneswar CEPT 41

37 Thank You! 42