connectkaro 2015 - session 2 - smart city smart mobility

SMART MOBILITY

APRIL 2015

By

Prof. Shivanand Swamy

Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport;

CEPT University, Ahmedabad

SMART CITY

INDIAN CITIES ARE GROWING

CITIES

THEY ARE DESIGNED FOR

COMMUNITY LIVING AND

COLLECTIVE MOBILITY

CITY COMPARIOSIONS

Aspect India Europe USA

Population Density 120 50 10-15

Percapita Motrised Trip Rates 0.75-1.1 2-3 2-3

Cars/1000 population 100 400 600-800'

Vehicles/1000 population 225 450 800-900'

Road length per capita (m) 0.75-1.25 2-3 5-7

Road length per ha (m) 100-120 115 90

% NMT Work Trips 20-25 15-20 5

NMT % of total passenger km 48 23 3

Car use-percapita(‘000km/yr) 1400 4500 12000

ICT Use Low High High

C

-Doubling of population in next 30-40

years

- Trip rates to double with increased

work participation (women coming into

workforce)

- Vehicle Ownership Rates Increasing

- How do we ensure mobility security?

- ALLOCATING ROAD SPACE FOR

COLLECTIVE MOBILITY IS THE WAY

FORWARD

- BRTS IS A KEY ELEMENT IN SMART

MOBILITY

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

0

5

10

15

20

25

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Cu

mu

lati

ve N

um

ber

of

Cit

ies

New

Cit

ies 2009: Ahmedabad

(Janmarg), India

2000: Bogotá

(TransMilenio),

Colombia

1974/1991*: Curitiba

1972/2010*: Lima

http://brtdata.org, October 2013

Growth of BRTS Worldover

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

BR

TS

Netw

ork

Le

ng

th (

in k

ms

)

Time Series

Latin America

North America

Europe

China

India

Growth of BRTS Worldover

MYTHS ABOUT BRTS

BRTS

• Takes away road space!

• Roads will be congested!

• Very few buses given priority over large mixed traffic

vehicles!

• Movement will be inefficient!

• Too much Investment – Too little a benefit

Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Surat Municipal Corporation : Government of GujaratTechnical Assistance: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. (An initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development,

Government of India)

CURRENT SCENARIO

By:

Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. In association with MoUD, Government of India & AMC

People moved : 150Area occupied – 84 sq. m

Queue length – 24 m.

Janmarg Mixed traffic

MORE BUSES MEAN LESS TRAFFICExisting Scenario (Ahmedabad) November 2012

Janmarg – Focus on Moving People..

People moved :77Area occupied – 486 sq. m.

Queue length - 54 m.

Phase Time – 40 Seconds

Cycle Length – 120 Seconds

By:


People moved – 150Area occupied – 84 sq. m



MORE CARS – Constant queue Length- Reduction in people

moved

MORE CARS MEANS LESS PEOPLE


People moved -45(Reduction from 77)

Area occupied – 486 sq. m.

Queue length - 54 m.

By:


People moved – 150

Area occupied – 84 sq. m


People moved -77

Queue length - 183 m.(Increase from 54 meters)

Phase time – 70 Seconds

Cycle Length – 180

Seconds


MORE CARS – Same No of people – Longer QueueMORE CARS MEANS LONGER QUES


Future Scenario: If the

Traffic is Doubled



By:


People moved – 280

Area occupied – 135 sq.

m


People moved -155

Queue length – 210 m.Phase time – 70 Seconds

Cycle Length – 180

Seconds


MORE CARS – Same No of people – Longer QueueMORE CARS MEANS LONGER QUES


18 M ARTICULATED BUS

CAPACITY- 140

IF BRTS DID

NOT EXIST

By:


People moved -240


Phase time – 100 Seconds

Cycle Length > 180 Seconds (Not Desirable)

Mixed traffic

Present scenario- without BRTSMORE CARS MEANS LONGER QUES


By:


People moved -240


Phase Time – 200 Seconds+ (Not possible to

operate with At-grade junction)

Mixed traffic

Future Scenario- (double traffic) without BRTSMORE CARS MEANS LONGER QUES


RESULTRESULT with NO BRTS



Without BRTS all modes are

SLOW

With BRTS even the

cars move faster!!

Who is Moving?

Origin - Destination Length

With BRT Without BRT Saving

Average Delay (s)Savings

(sec)

Average

Delay (sec)

Average Delays w/o

BRT over with BRT From To (Km) BRT Mix Traffic

Helmet Keshavbaug 2.1 104 339 235 395 3.8 times

Helmet Shivaranajani 2.6 138 368 230 431 3.1 times

SIMULATION RESULTS FROM VISSIM-- FROM HELMET TO SHIVARAJANI INTERSECTION

• The evaluation results indicate the average speed of 27.2 and 22-24 kmph for

BRT and mixed traffic respectively.

• The evaluation results indicate the average speed under mixed traffic situation

is 16-19 KMPHAhmedabad Municipal Corporation and Surat Municipal Corporation : Government of Gujarat

Technical Assistance: Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad. (An initiative of the Ministry of Urban Development,


SPEED DELAY ANALYSIS

BRTS – A SMART WAY TO MOBILITY

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

22000

24000

18

02

19

80

21

58

23

36

25

14

26

92

28

70

30

48

32

26

34

04

35

82

37

60

39

38

41

16

42

94

44

72

46

50

48

28

50

06

51

84

53

62

55

40

57

18

58

96

60

74

Dis

tan

ce

Tra

ve

lle

d

Distance Travelled

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20000

22000

24000

18

02

19

20

20

38

21

56

22

74

23

92

25

10

26

28

27

46

28

64

29

82

31

00

32

18

33

36

34

54

35

72

36

90

38

08

39

26

40

44

41

62

42

80

43

98

45

16

46

34

47

52

Distance Travelled

Sample size: 10 Buses

Bunching of buses in no

BRT scenario leads to

higher journey time.

Sample size: 12 Buses

Segregated bus lanes

reduce bunching by

increasing reliability

BRTS adds system reliability

No BRT Scenario BRT scenario

Average Journey Time: 38 mins & 31 minsAverage Journey Time: 60 mins

LESSON: BUILD BRTS

- Full BRTS

-Light BRTS

-Elevated BRTS





Bogota BRT System – FULL BRTS

Route Length operational 84km

BRTS Stations 114

Daily Ridership 1,650,000

Bus Capacity 140 /210

System Capacity 45,000 pphpd currently

System Speed (avg.) 28.0 kmph

Curitiba BRT System – FULL BRTS

Route Length operational 81 km

BRTS Stations 113

Daily Ridership 504,500

Bus Capacity 80/140/210


System Speed (avg.) 19 kmph

Case Studies



Xiamen BRTS – Elevated Corridor – FULL BRTS

Route Length operational 67.5km

BRTS Stations 47

Daily Ridership -

Bus Capacity 80


System Speed (avg.) 27.0 kmph

Istanbul BRT System – FULL BRTS

Route Length operational 42km

BRTS Stations 33

Daily Ridership 600,000

Bus Capacity 170


System Speed 42kmph (avg.)

Case Studies

ELEVATED BRTS

Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Amdavad

PRO(s):

• Can respond to RoW

constraints upto 24 m

• Minimize R&R

impacts

• Reduce delays

CON(s):

• Higher capital cost

• Longer construction

time

• Traffic management

during implementation

BRTS BHUBANESWAR

Junction Treatment for BRTS LITE

Segregation at BRTS LITE Station

Parking Mess

Eg from Ahmedabad

On-Street Parking reduces

Road Infrastructure Capacity

Traffic Speed

PARKING MANAGEMENT !!!

Planned On site situation

Element Width % covered Width % covered

Footpath 2.25m 15 % 2.25m 15 %

Carriageway 9.25m 50% 7m 22%

BRT lane 3.65m

25 %

3.65m

25 %BRT Stop 1.9m 1.9m

Parking 2.25 8 % 6m 36%

DO WE

HAVE AN

OPTION ?

BRTS SURAT

2006

NO

PUBLIC

TRANSPORT

BRTS SURAT

2009

SOME

PUBLIC

TRANSPORT

BRTS SURAT

2014

BRTS as

PUBLIC

TRANSPORT

INTEGRATED LAND USE WITH

MASS TRANSIT 2021

Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad

Focus on moving people

Centre of Excellence in Urban Transport, CEPT University, Ahmedabad

BRTS Breaks Social Barrier

THANK YOU

connectkaro 2015 - session 2 - smart city smart mobility

Government & Nonprofit

moving people

road length

government of india

mqueue length

secondscycle length

ahmedabad janmarg

people movedmore cars

ministry of urban development