Assessment of Transit Transfer Experience:Case of Bangalore

Christy Ann CheriyanProf. Shalini Sinha

Contents

oIntroduction

oNeed for the study

oObjectives

oTransfers: Level of transfers

oMethodology

oCase Study- Bangalore

oAnalysis-Transfer Users & Non-Transfer Users

oComparison & Recommendations

2

Rapid pace ofurbanization& increasing need

for travel

PublicTransport

systems tosupport the

need for travel

Integration:Single journey

experience

Transfers:physical and fareintegration plays

a role

Introduction

3

o Transfers are a necessary evilo Passengers dislike transferring but agencies forced to do transfer

o No. of studies related to transfers are limitedo Limited studies are done in India

o NUTP’s focus on Integrated public transport in Indian cities

o Cities investing in mass transit systems

o First step to study transfers: analyze the factors underlying transfers andpassengers’ perception

Need for the Study

4

Research Questions

o To evaluate the role of transfers in public transport journeyfor passengers

1. What are the factors contributing to transfer experience in IndianScenario?

2. How transfer experience varies for passenger groups and transfer levels?3. What are the needs of non-transfer users to make transfer process easy

for them?

Objective

5

Transfers

“ A process in which passengers’ transfer/change from one service/modeto another”

Transfer station-A place where transfer process occur

Transfer Users: Passengers who change their mode/service during PublicTransport Journey

6

Non-Transfer Users: Passengers who use Public Transport but do nottransfer

Levels of Transfers

Regional transport

Urban transport mode 1

Urban transport mode 2

Intermodal Terminal

Transit Center

Transit Stations

Source: Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual – 2nd edition TCRP

7

Transfer Process

Origin Transitstop

Transferstation

Transitstop Destination

Walk time

In vehicle In vehicle Walk

Walk

Perceived walk time

Wait

Wait time

Perceived wait time

Ticketing

Ticketing time

Ticket cost

Walk

8

Factors affecting transfer behavior

Trip factorsPers

onal

fact

ors

Servicefactors

Stat

ion

fact

ors

•Age•Gender•Employment•Income•HH Size•Vehicle Ownership•Familiarity

•Trip purpose•Trip time

•Mode•Ticket type•Frequency

•Type•Distance•Number of platforms•Information availability•Associated Infrastructure•Safety•Comfort•LU•Rush in the station

•Headway•Reliability•Schedule

•Fare structure•Route structure

This research will study the transfer experience for different transfer levels (atselected stations of a metropolitan city in India) by analyzing the factors affecting

the transfer experience

9

Methodology for transfer users

SatisfactionLevels

Importance-

SatisfactionAnalysis

FactorAnalysis

StructuralEquation

Modelling

Identifiesmajor

variableswhich require

attention

Reducesthe

variablesto a

smallerset of

factorswhich aresignificant

Identifiesthe

significanceof eachfactor

10

Analysis Framework

IS Analysis

Factor Analysis

SEM

Intermodal term

Transit station

Transit center

Gender

Frequency

Transfer Users

Age

11

Bangalore

One of theeleven

METROPOLITANcities in India

with population

of 8.5 million

Road length of6000 km in8005sq.km of

BMR

PT mode share :38.5%

PT trip length:10.8 km

PT trip rate:0.39

UrbanTransport

mainly Roadbased with

extensive busservice by

BMTC

Source: CTTS 2010, BangalorePicture Courtesy: Sarath K T

12

Case Stations

1

2

3

CASE STATIONS

13

1. Intermodal Terminal Majestic

Majestic:•Regional Rail & KSRTC•BMTC buses & Proposed Metro

2. Transit Center Mantri Square

Mantri square:•BMTC buses & Metro

Yeshwantpur3. Transit Station

YeshwantpurBus Station:•BMTC buses

Comparison- Transfer Levels

Majestic Mantri Square Yeshwantpur

Transfer type Intermodal Terminal Transit center Transit station

Modes RR, RB, Metro, Bus Metro, Bus Bus

Facilities

Bus stop hierarchy Traffic Transit ManagementCenters (TTMC)

Bus stop BMTC TTMC

Platforms

Information onroutes

Waiting

Restrooms

Facilitated transfer

Help desks 14

Intermodal Terminal- Majestic

15

GUBB

I TH

OD

APPA

RO

AD

CITY BUS ROAD

KEMPEGOWDA BUS STATION

KSRTC REGIONAL BUS STAND

PROPOSED METRO STATION

KEMPEGOWDA BUS STATIONKSRTC BUS STAND

Transfer Experience-Majestic

CITY BUS ROAD

140m

190m

240m

320m

570 m/ 15min

TRAIN-BUS Walk-15 min Wait-5-60 min

8-10 min 130m/5-10min

KSRTC-BMTC Walk-5-10 min Wait-5-60 min

BMTC-BMTC Walk-5 min Wait-5-60 min

16

Transfer Data- Majestic

CITY BUS ROAD

140m

190m

240m

320m

78%22%

Total

87samples

17

Majestic

18

Components

Facility Design

Service Characteristics

Ticketing Safety and security

Amenities

Service Information•Distance to walk between services•Easiness to walk•Access to station•Lighting facilities at the station•Vertical circulation elements

•Time to wait for next service•Timely arrival of next service

•Money to be paid for transferring•Time for ticketing

• Availability of sign boards and maps•Help desks

•Information on routes and services

•Waiting areas•Comfortable environment

•Cleanliness•Availability of restrooms, ATMs, etc

•Easy access to amenities

•Safety during day and night•Presence of security guards

19

IS Analysis-Majestic

Mos

tIm

port

ant

1VerySatisfied

2

3N

otIm

port

ant

4

VeryDissatisfied

•Lighting Facilities• Availability of information• Presence of adequate stairs• Comfortable environment

• Safety during day and night• Presence of security guards• Cleanliness of the station• Availability of amenities• Timely arrival of vehicle

•Availability of signboards & maps•Short distance to walk•Easiness to walk•Easiness to access•Ticketing time•Waiting time•Waiting areas

•Access to amenities•Presence of help desks•Transfer ticket fare •Safety and security

•Cleanliness•Reliability of services

Need immediate attention20

Factor Analysis-Majestic

VariablesComponent

1 2 3 4 5FD1- Short distance to walk betweenservices -.095 .780 .033 .034 .228

FD2- Easiness to walk .017 .676 .363 .192 .161FD3 – Lighting facilities at station .516 .571 .200 .217 -.250FD4 –Easiness to reach station .257 .764 -.021 -.032 -.007SR1 –Less time to wait .051 .116 .135 .867 .056SR2 –Timely arrival of bus .264 -.099 .086 .742 -.145FC1 – Less money to be paid .106 .165 .261 .541 .465FC2 –Less time to take ticket .078 .191 .008 .013 .785I1 –Availability of signboards and maps .096 .277 .758 .069 .208I2 –Presence of help desks .422 -.011 .638 .183 .061I3 –information on routes/services .377 .103 .726 .116 -.157A1 –Adequate waiting areas .494 -.037 .698 .144 -.020A2 –Comfortable environment .640 .001 .323 .146 -.124A3 –Cleanliness .762 .052 .160 .147 -.140A4 –Availability of amenities .787 -.151 .197 .203 .244A5 –Access to amenities .701 -.093 .300 .182 .272SS1 –Safety during day and night .834 .287 .059 .005 .015SS2 –Security facilities .780 .148 .254 -.031 .048FD5 –Adequate vertical circulationelements .146 -.633 -.002 .321 -.531

21

SEM-Majestic

Transfersatisfaction

Comfort &safety

Facilitydesign

Information& waiting

Ticketingtime

Service &Fare

integration

0.36

Comfort, safety, information and waiting are significant for transfer satisfaction22

SEM Passenger Groups-Majestic

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8

RegressionCoeff.

RegularOccasional

For regular users, facility design is thrice significant and integration of services is twicesignificant than occasional users.For occasional users, information and amenities are significant

23

SEM Passenger Groups-Majestic

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Regressioncoeff

MaleFemale

•Comfort and safety twice significant for female transfer users than male users and 20times more significant than short and easy distance to walk, whereas for male users all thecomponents are equally significant.

24

SEM- Transfer Levels

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8

Regr

essi

onCo

eff.

MajesticYeshwantpurMantri

•Comfort, safety, information and waiting are significant for transfer users at all transferlevels•Significance of service integration towards transfer experience is higher at lower leveltransfer stations.

25

Non Transfer Users

Most likely

Least likely

Rank Variable Percentage1 If you get next service within 1 minute 70%

2 If the next service arrives on time 43%

3 If you feel safe and secure during day and night at station 43%

4 If you don’t have to pay for changing services 35%

5 If there are adequate security facilities at the station 35%

Service Integration : Less time to wait and reliability of services are important for non-transfer users

Comparison

27

Variable Transfer user Non-transfer Proposed Plans

1. Safety All transfer levels andall passenger groups

•TTMC s attempt to provide safe,comfortable environment at the station

•Identified need of safe access andwaiting areas at Mantri square

2. Comfort All transfer levels andall passenger groups

3. Amenities For Mantri square

4. ServiceIntegration

For transit center-station, females

•Extremely important•Need immediate attention

5. Fare Integration

6. Information All transfer levels andall passenger groups

7. Waiting All transfer levels andall passenger groups

• Identified need of more waiting areasat Mantri. Dissatisfaction at TTMCs

8. Facility design Interchange within abuilding preferred

• For upcoming projects, identified needof transfers within a building

Recommendation

1 Comfortable, clean, safe environment and adequate waiting and access facilities atthe transfer stations.

•Easy and safe access to the station•Shaded walking and waiting facilities•Maintain the cleanliness at the station•Safe adequate waiting areas

2 Integration of services and maintaining the reliability of these services.•Less time to wait for next service•Availability of next service on time

Adequate, accurate information on routes, services, platforms etc. attransfer stations

•Information on routes and services•Information on platforms•Adequate signboards and maps•Presence of adequate helpdesks

3

28

Thank You…..

29