5.2 Benchmarking Urban Transport Service - Experience From India

Urban Transport Service Level Benchmarking in Urban
Transport for Indian Cities

Ahmedabad | Bhubaneswar | Hubli-Dharwad | Kohima | Mysore | Surat
An Initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India
Presented by
Prof. H.M. Shivanand Swamy
Ministry of Urban Development
Government of India, New Delhi Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport
Urban Transport Service Level Benchmarking
• A comprehensive framework to measure and monitor urban

transport performance in India - established in 2011 by the Ministry
of Urban Development, GOI
• Identifies problem areas and areas of excellence
• An ongoing process
• Collects data for comparative purposes
• Review of best practice in the activity to form basis for
defining level of service

2
Government of India, New Delhi
Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport
Urban Transport Service Level Benchmarking
• A mechanism for introducing accountability in service delivery of
urban transport comparing service performance levels against set
targets or good practices.
• Useful for assessing performance trends and setting targets
• Inputs to land use transport strategy formulation
• Assessing investment outcomes
• To showcase achievements / good practice
• Envisaged as an annual activity to be presented as a annual

budgeting exercise

5
Preparatory Study for Benchmarking
Study Area Delineation
1 2
Mark the Municipal limits
1 of the city- (a)
Mark the village / town

boundaries in Urban
2 Development Authority
area (b)
Digitize the contiguous
3 built-up area adjoining the 3
municipal limits (c)
Select the villages/ towns

4 that correspond to step 1.
(b & c= d)
Bhubaneswar
Study area :179 sq.km
Define the Study area i.e.
5 Municipal area + Area
selected in step 4 (a + d)

Government of India, New Delhi 6 Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport
Selection of network inventory
Digitization of roads
Classification of
road into four levels
Arterial and sub

arterial and all roads
where PT is plying

Selection of Public Transport – Routes
1
Identification of corridors with
Headways<60mins –
•Less than 10 min- Survey all the

routes
•10-20 minutes- 25% of the
randomly selected routes
•20-60 min- 25% of the randomly
selected routes
2
All routes that ply on the selected
road for inventory

Selection of Public Transport –Stops
1
Selection of bus stops for
calculating average waiting time
Out of the total number of bus stops (N),

a sample of (n) bus stops (depending on
city size) is selected to calculate the avg.
waiting time :-
1. > 4 million - 10%
2. 1 . 4 million -25%
3. <1 million-50%
2
A reco survey was conducted in
Ahmedabad. it was observed that waiting
time is not always half of headway
3
Relation between headways and waiting
time was established through this surveys
for Headways Constant
1. <10 mins <10 0.40
2. 10-20mins 10-20 0.40
3. 20-60 mins >20 - 60 0.29

Data collection
Secondary Data Collection
• Data sources like annual reports, websites, etc for secondary data
collection
• Focus of data collection was on updated information for the indicators
using data that is dynamic in nature.
• Necessity to cross check data – to avoid misinterpretation and to identify
valid reason for change in number
Primary Data Collection

• Road inventory Survey
• Level of Comfort Surveys
• Speed and Delay Surveys
• NMT Facilities at Transit Stations
• Lux Survey
• Land use along Transit corridor

10
Adapting Indicators for Hill Cities
Why do we need to look at Hill Cities differently?
Geographical constraints
• Steep slopes, landslides, heterogeneity of climate, land use
pattern and scarcity of buildable land
Scale and Size

• Size of these cities maybe smaller but the scale is much larger as
it is driven by both residents and visitors
Functionality
• specific features of these areas tend to reflect on the different
time frame for the local mobility , economy and also the social
characteristics

Issues Reasoning
• Service Coverage of public

transport is defined by:
- Network length
- Area covered at 500 m 1. 500 m in plain cities is equivalent
• Cannot take coverage as 500m to what in hill cities?
from stops due to topography
*it takes 6 minutes for 500m @ 5km/hr

(Naismith rule)

Research background methodology to compute basis for Hill Cities
Developing a base Survey required for computation
Base information required to

1.Public transport user survey
collect for all hill cities
2. Average walking speed
1. Contours
2. Generate Elevation from
Contours
3. Generate Slopes from
Elevation.
4. Using Path distance tool
and applying Tobler’s hiking Interpretation of 500m buffer
function (vertical factors) to
calculate the cost in terms
of time.

Computation
Result from survey Calculation for computation
Sample size 1% of ridership-220nos
1. 500m = 230 m
 75% of bus users use walk as an
i.e. It takes 6 minutes to walk
access and egress mode 230m in hill areas
 45 % of the bus users are walking
10 minutes 2. Willingness to walk = 20 mins
 23% of the bus users are willing = 750m
to walk upto 2o minutes to a bus i.e. Coverage of public transport
is 750m instead of 500m
stops
because people walk more on
 Average walking speed is 2.3 hilly areas.
km/hr

Pedestrian Infrastructure facilities
Issues Reasoning
• Presence of high number of • Footpath along the road may not

footsteps that provides always be possible because of
connectivity limited right of way.
• An important means of access
• 2.Therefore, footsteps become
particularly for areas that are not
important to consider
accessible by road. somewhere in the benchmarking
process as these are important
access points and are also
considered as local roads.

Modified Indicator within Focus Areas
Pedestrian Infrastructure facilities – Hill Cities
Survey required for

Methodology
computation
Classification of footsteps
1. Footstep survey
Step 1:
• Identify steps that connect to PT 1. Quality of
stops @ 250 metre length either footsteps
side of the stops – Survey 75% 2. Pedestrian
Step 2: interview
• Identify steps that connect level 1
& level 2 roads(connecting
commercial and Institution and
residential) - Survey 50%
Step 3: Sample 70 nos
• Identify steps that provide
connectivity to more than 10
households- survey 25%
Paved footsteps
Near NST Station High School Near Red cross building

Unpaved footsteps
Along NH-29 Martyrs Park to PWD office Along NH-29

MoUD’s Service Level Benchmarks (SLBs)
Focus Areas:
2. Financial 3. Pedestrian
1. Public Transport Sustainability of Infrastructure
Public Transport Facilities
5. Application of
4. Non-Motorized 6. Road Network
Intelligent Transport
Transport Facilities Performance
Facilities
7. Parking
8. Road Safety 9. Environment
Management
10. Integrated Land

11. Intermediate
Use -Transport
Public Transport*
System
* Additional Focus Area suggested by CoE

Indicators - Public Transport
“Efficiency”
“Availability” 7. Average waiting time for Public
1. Presence of Organized Public Transport users (min)
Transport System in Urban Area (%) 8. Average Travel speed of public
2. Extent of Supply - Availability of transport (KMPH)**
Public Transport 9. Breakdown of Public Transport
10. Vehicle Utilization of Public
Transport
“Quality (Attractiveness)” “Coverage/Access”
3. Level of Comfort in Public 11. Service Coverage of Public
Transport (Crowding) Transport in the city
4. % fleet size as per urban bus 12. Transit Access Area- (% built-up area
specification within 500m of PT plying) *
5. Affordability of public transport 13High frequency transit accessible
6. Interchanges with Multimodal area (% area with transit access 10min
Facility or less headway) *
14. Total boarding/ population*

“Availability”
Indicators Computation Level of service
1 Range LoS
Total number of buses operating on road
> = 60% 1
=(a) 141 ( 99 city bus+42 BRTS)
40 – 60% 2
Total number of buses under the
Presence of Organized ownership of STU/SPV or under 20 – 40% 3
Public Transport System concession agreement = (b) 141 1
in Urban Area (%) < 20% 4
Presence of Organized Public Transport
System in Urban Area (%) =( b/a)*100
=100%
(Source: SMC, 2015)
Indicators Computation Level of service

2
Range* LoS
No of Buses available in a city on any day
= (a) 141 > = 0.6 1
Extent of Supply-
Availability of Public
Total Population of the study area = (b) 0.4 – 0.6 2
Transport 4
5465566 ( estimated population 2015)
(Vary with population
size class) 0.2 –0.4 3
Availability of Public transport /1000
population = (a/b) < 0.2 4
(141/5465566)*1000=.02
Target Set
Focus Areas: 1. Presence of Organized Public Transport System in Urban
1
Area
1. Public Transport Facilities
2. Extent of Supply/Availability of Public Transport 2
2. Financial Sustainability of 3. Service Coverage of Public Transport in the study area 2
Public Transport 4. Transit accessible area (% built up area within 500 m of 2
PT plying)
3.Pedestrian Infrastructure
Facilities 5. High frequency transit accessible area (% transit area 2
with headway of ≤10 minutes)
4. Non-Motorized Transport 2
6. Average waiting time for Public Transport users
Facilities
7. Level of Comfort in Public Transport 2
5.Application of Intelligent 8. Percentage fleet size as per urban bus specification
2
Transport Facilities 2
9. Total boarding / 1000 Population
6. Road Network 2
10. Average Travel speed of Public Transport along key
Performance corridors
2
7. Parking Management 11. Affordability of Public Transport
2
12. Breakdown of Public Transport
2
8. Road Safety 13. Vehicle Utilization of Public Transport 1
14. Interchanges having Multi modal Facilities
9. Environment
Overall LoS Calculated LoS
10. Integrated Land Use - Composite LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + 1 14
Transport System LoS3 + LoS4 + LoS5 + 2 15-28
11. Intermediate Public
LoS6….+LoS14) and identify 3 29-42
Transport*
Government of India, New Delhi overall LOS 24 Centre of4 42-56
Excellence in Urban Transport
Focus Areas:
1. Public Transport Facilities Target Set
1. Extent of Non-Fare Revenue 1
2. Financial Sustainability of 2. Staff per Bus Ratio 2
Public Transport 3. Operating Ratio 1
3. Pedestrian Infrastructure
Facilities
4. Non-Motorized Transport Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + LoS3) and

Facilities
identify overall LOS
5. Application of Intelligent
Transport Facilities
6. Road Network
Performance Overall LoS Calculated LoS
7. Parking Management 1 3
2 4-6
7. Road Safety
3 7-9
9. Environment 4 10-12
10. Integrated Land Use -
Transport System
Transport*
Focus Areas:
Target Set
2. Financial Sustainability of
1. Availability of Signalized intersection 2
Public Transport
2. Signalized Intersection Delay 2
3. Pedestrian Infrastructure 3. Percentage City Covered with 2
Facilities Footpath
4. Street Lighting (Lux level) 2
4. Non-Motorized Transport
Facilities
5. Application of Intelligent Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + LoS3+LoS4)

Transport Facilities and identify overall LOS
6. Road Network
Performance
7. Parking Management Overall LoS Calculated LoS
8. Road Safety 1 4
2 5-8
9. Environment
3 9-12
10. Integrated Land Use - 4 13-16
Transport System
Transport*
Focus Areas:
Target Set
1. NMT Coverage (% Network covered) 3
2. Financial Sustainability of 2. Encroachment on NMT roads by Vehicle 3
Public Transport Parking
3. NMT Parking Facilities at interchanges 3
Facilities
Facilities Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + LoS3) and
5. Application of Intelligent identify overall LOS
6. Road Network
2 4-6
8. Road Safety
3 7-9
Transport System
Transport*
Focus Areas: Target Set
1. Public Transport Facilities 1. Availability of Traffic Surveillance System 1
2. Passenger Information System 1
2. Financial Sustainability of 3. Global Positioning System/AVLS
Public Transport 1
4. Signal Synchronization
5. Integrated Ticketing System 1
3. Pedestrian Infrastructure 1
Facilities
Facilities Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + LoS3…+LoS5)
5. Application of Intelligent and identify overall LOS
6. Road Network
2 6-10
8. Road Safety
3 11-15
Transport System
Transport*
1. Average Travel Speed of Personal Vehicles 1
1. Public Transport Facilities 2. Average Travel Speed of Public Transport -
3. Road Density -
2. Financial Sustainability of 4. Percentage of Higher Order roads -
Public Transport 5. Street Lightening (LUX) on Roads 2
6. Percentage of Developed Area Under
3. Pedestrian Infrastructure -
Roads
Facilities
Facilities Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + LoS3…+LoS6)
5. Application of Intelligent and identify overall LOS
6. Road Network
2 7-12
8. Road Safety 3 13-18

Transport System
Transport*
Focus Areas:
1. Public Transport Facilities Target Set
1. Availability of Parking Spaces 2
2. Financial Sustainability of 2. Ratio of Maximum and Minimum 2
Public Transport Parking Fee In The City
Facilities
Facilities Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2) and identify
5. Application of Intelligent overall LOS
6. Road Network
2 3–4
8. Road Safety 3 5–6
9. Environment 4 7–8

Transport System
Transport*
Focus Areas:
Target Set
1. Fatality Rate per Lakh Population 1
2. Fatality Rate for Pedestrian & NMT 2
Public Transport users
3. Serious Injuries per Lakh Population -
Facilities
6. Road Network
2 4-6
8. Road Safety
3 7-9

Transport System
Transport*
1. Annual Mean Concentration of SO2 (μg/m3 )
1. Public Transport Facilities 1
2. Annual Mean Concentration of NO2 (μg/m3 ) 1
3. Annual Mean Concentration of SPM (PM10) 1
(μg/m3 )
Public Transport
4. Annual Mean Concentration of RSPM (PM2.5) 1
3. Pedestrian Infrastructure (μg/m3 )
Facilities
Facilities Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + LoS3+LoS4) and
6. Road Network
2 5-8

Transport System
Transport*
Target Set
Focus Areas: -
1. Population Density
1. Public Transport Facilities -
2. Mixed Land Use Zoning (% of area under
non residential use)
2. Financial Sustainability of -
3. Intensity of Development
Public Transport -
4. Intensity of development along transit
-
corridor
3. Pedestrian Infrastructure -
5. Road network pattern and completeness
Facilities
6. Percentage network covered with
4. Non-Motorized Transport exclusive ROW
-
Facilities
5. Application of Intelligent
Transport Facilities Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + LoS3…+LoS7)
and identify overall LOS
6. Road Network
Performance
7. Parking Management Overall LoS Calculated LoS
8. Road Safety 1 6
2 7-12
9. Environment
3 13-18
10. Integrated Land Use - 4 19-24
Transport System
Transport*
Focus Areas:
Target Set
1. Presence of IPT Vehicles per 1000 -
2. Financial Sustainability of population
2. IPT Vehicles with ITS Facilities/GPS -
Public Transport
3. Average Speed of IPT -
Facilities
6. Road Network
2 4-6

Transport System
Transport*
Report Card

Report Card: Surat
Level of Service for Urban
Sr. No Benchmarks Transport
LoS for 2015 LoS for 2012
1 Public Transport Facilities 3 4
2 Financial Sustainability of Public Transport 4 4
3 Pedestrian Infrastructure Facilities 3 3
4 Non-Motorized Transport Facilities 3 3
5 Application of ITS Facilities 3 4
6 Road Network Performance 2 2
7 Parking Management 2 3
8 Road Safety 3 3
9 Environment 1 1
10 Integrated Land Use Transport System 2 3
11 Intermediate Public Transport 3 3
Legend - Change Colour Code Legend – LoS Colour Code
No Change LoS 1
Positive Change LoS 2
Negative Change LoS 3
LoS 4

Development of PublicTransport
in Surat

SURAT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
• Surat with NO Public Transport – 2004

• Surat with limited Public Transport – 2009

• Surat with Bus Rapid Transit System – 2014

Development of transport in surat
• Bus Rapid Transit System-2014

Bus Rapid Transit System-2016

SLB | Ahmedabad
SLB | Ahmedabad
SLB | Ahmedabad
1. Public Transport Facilities Overall
Target Surat Indicator Value - PT Facilities Surat LoS -PT Facilities
Sr. No Public Transport Facilities
LoS*
2018#
2015 2012
2018#
2015 LoS
2012
Presence of Organized Public
1 Transport System in Urban Area 1 100% 100% 100% 1 1 1
(%)
Extent of Supply-Availability of
2 Public Transport (PT per 1000 2 0.26 0.026 0.023 2 4 4
population)
Service Coverage of Public
3 2 1.43 0.42 0.31 1 3 3
Transport in Study Area (km/km2)
Transit Access Area (% built-up
4 2 72% 48% 46% 1 3 3
area within 500 m of PT plying)
High Frequency transit accessible
5 area (% area with transit access 2 72% 26% 10% 1 4 4
10 min or less headway)
Average Waiting Time for Public
6 2 4 6 12 1 1 4
Transport Users (minutes)
Level of Comfort in Public
7 3 1.2 1.8 2.5 1 2 3
Transport (passenger/seat)
Percentage Fleet Size as per
8 3 100% 26% 0% 1 3 4
Urban Bus Specification (UBS) (%)
Total Boarding per 1000
9 2 12 15 4 4
population
Average Travel Speed of Public
10 2 22 24 1 1
Transport (kmph)
Affordability of Public Transport (%
11 2 17% 14% 1 1
expenditure on transportation)
Breakdown of Public Transport
12 3.05 NA 1 4 4
(per 10,000 km)
13 Vehicle Utilization (km per day) 205 165 166 2 4 4
Interchanges having Multimodal
14 72% 17% 0% 1 4 4
Facilities (%)
Total Score 39 44
Overall LoS – 3 3 4
Ministry of Urban Development 45

Government of India, New Delhi Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport
BENCHMARKING URBAN TRANSPORT 46
Thank you
Contact:
Coe.ut@cept.ac.in
www.utbenchmark.in
Ministry of Urban Development Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport

Government of India, New Delhi (COE) CEPT University, Ahmedabad
Strategy for mobility security
BENCHMARKING URBAN TRANSPORT 47
• Mobility Security (Example from Janmarg-
Ahmedabad)
Vehicl Number People Vehicle Number People
e of
Janmarg Mixed traffic of
vehicles vehicles
BRTS 2 180
People moved : 180 People moved :91 Four
wheeler
14 21
Area occupied – 84 sq. m Area occupied – 850 sq.

Queue length – 24 m. m. Rickshaw 11 20
Queue length - 85 m. Two 29 43
wheeler
Cycle 7 7
Ministry of Urban Development Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport

Government of India, New Delhi (COE) CEPT University, Ahmedabad

5.2 Benchmarking Urban Transport Service - Experience From India

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

5.2 Benchmarking Urban Transport Service - Experience From India

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Urban Transport Service Level Benchmarking in Urban

Transport for Indian Cities

An Initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India

• A comprehensive framework to measure and monitor urban

Ministry of Urban Development

• Envisaged as an annual activity to be presented as a annual

Ministry of Urban Development

Mark the village / town

Select the villages/ towns

Ministry of Urban Development

Arterial and sub

Ministry of Urban Development

•Less than 10 min- Survey all the

Ministry of Urban Development

Out of the total number of bus stops (N),

Ministry of Urban Development

Primary Data Collection

Ministry of Urban Development

Scale and Size

Ministry of Urban Development

• Service Coverage of public

*it takes 6 minutes for 500m @ 5km/hr

Ministry of Urban Development

Developing a base Survey required for computation

Base information required to

Ministry of Urban Development

Sample size 1% of ridership-220nos

Ministry of Urban Development

• Presence of high number of • Footpath along the road may not

Ministry of Urban Development

Survey required for

Near NST Station High School Near Red cross building

Ministry of Urban Development

Along NH-29 Martyrs Park to PWD office Along NH-29

Ministry of Urban Development

10. Integrated Land

* Additional Focus Area suggested by CoE

Ministry of Urban Development

Ministry of Urban Development

Indicators Computation Level of service

4. Non-Motorized Transport Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + LoS3) and

5. Application of Intelligent Calculated LoS = (LoS1 + LoS2 + LoS3+LoS4)

7. Parking Management Overall LoS Calculated LoS

10. Integrated Land Use -

10. Integrated Land Use -

10. Integrated Land Use -

10. Integrated Land Use -

7. Parking Management Overall LoS Calculated LoS

10. Integrated Land Use -

Ministry of Urban Development

Ministry of Urban Development

Ministry of Urban Development

Ministry of Urban Development

Ministry of Urban Development

Ministry of Urban Development

Ministry of Urban Development

Ministry of Urban Development

Ministry of Urban Development 45

Ministry of Urban Development Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport

Area occupied – 84 sq. m Area occupied – 850 sq.

Ministry of Urban Development Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport

S-ar putea să vă placă și