Professional Documents
Culture Documents
EVALUATION REPORT
Table of Contents
1
Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 2
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
2.1.1
2.1.2
2.1.3
2.1.4
2.1.5
2.1.6
2.2
2.2.1
2.2.2
2.2.3
2.3
2.3.1
3
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 12
EVALUATION OF CITY BUS SERVICE (KGF) .......................................................... 13
Introduction
The demand for urban transport in India is determined by trends such as substantial increase
in urban population, household incomes and industrial and commercial activities. With the
economy growing today at a rapid pace this demand has only increased and public
transportation systems have not been able to keep pace with the rapid and substantial increase
in demand. Public transport is the primary mode of transport in the bigger cities and metros.
This includes anywhere between 22-46% of the total trips for travel in cities with population
> 80 lakhs. City bus transport is the most common and predominant form of public transport
in cities with population greater than 1 million. Cities with a poor public transportation
system have a higher availability of para-transit and private modes. Intermediate public
transport systems like tempos, autos and cycle rickshaws assume importance to meet the
travel demand in mid-level cities.
Bus services in particular have deteriorated and passengers have turned to personalized
modes and intermediate public transport (IPT) (such as auto rickshaws, jeeps, taxi, tempos,
mini buses etc.), adding to traffic congestion which impacted on bus operations to a large
extent.
The legislation available to regulate bus operations in Indian cities i.e. Motor Vehicle Act
1988, modified by the Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Act, 1994 does not lay enough
emphasis on Public Private Partnership (PPP) operations. Accordingly in most states, the
State Transport Undertakings (STUs) continue to dominate the road transport sector.
However, with their priorities set towards inter state and inter city operations, in most cases
city bus operations have taken a backseat and STUs either do not provide service or only
offer limited services or provide service with buses which are not considered fit for long
distance operations. Besides, city bus operations are considered to be loss making and hence
claim least priority. Further, in medium and small size cities, fleet availability by STUs has
steadily declined with a sharp decline in patronage. The vacuum created by is being filled by
IPT modes, which are fragmented and poorly regulated private sector operations.
In this regard, The Government of Karnataka created the Directorate of Urban Land
Transport (DULT) under the Urban Development Department to integrate and coordinate all
land transport matter in the State. Directorate of Urban Land Transport (DULT), Government
of Karnataka, took up the initiative of supporting the introduction of city bus services in Tier
Directorate of Urban Land Transport
KGF City
Limited
(BEML)
Public
Sector
Undertaking under the Ministry of Defense has also set up a large manufacturing unit in
KGF. The major source of employment are agriculture, dairy and sericulture and due to
which the city is known as the land of Silk, Milk and Gold. Farmers in Kolar are totally
dependent upon bore-well water for irrigation and drinking. The Gold Fields was closed in
2003 due to reducing gold deposits and increasing cost of production.
There are few famous temples and tourist destinations in and around the city like Mulbagal,
Guttahalli, Kotilingeshwara, Antara Gange, Kolar Gold Fields and Bangarapet etc.
Directorate of Urban Land Transport
The city had a population of 1, 62,230 during the 2011 census. CMC, Robertsonpet, KGF is
handling the administration of the city which is the biggest municipality among the district
occupying 58.12 Sq. Km of area. Figure 1 illustrates the growth of population in KGF city
from 1901 to 2011 based on census of India statistics. It can be clearly seen that population of
KGF is on a significant growth trend in the last few decades.
that
while
the
vehicular
which
44,520
came
from
Vehicle Type
Two wheelers
Cars & Jeeps
No. of Vehicles
44,520
3,269
Cabs
Auto-Rickshaw
Omni buses
Tractors & Trailers
Goods vehicles
Private buses
Others
Total
78
1,406
120
3,426
1,976
89
390
55,274
motorcycles alone.
1.4
Considering the need, necessity and demand for public Transport in KGF city, KSRTC took
up the initiative of providing the sustainable city bus transport operations in KGF. 3 routes
with 15 schedules were proposed by KSRTC, out of which 1 route with 6 schedules were
found to be operating in KGF. The route details are as given below.
Route No.
Route
From
201
202
203
204
205
206
KGF
KGF
KGF
KGF
KGF
KGF
Route Length
To
Bangarapet
Bangarapet
Bangarapet
Bangarapet
Bangarapet
Bangarapet
14
14
14
14
14
14
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
The growing challenges of the urban sector in India requires a system which can measure the
performance of urban transport activities and also address the performance monitoring for
internal decision making. With this perspective, Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD)
framed a standard set of performance benchmarks which can help Urban Local Bodies
(ULBs) and other agencies in identifying performance gaps and suggesting improvements
through the sharing of information and best practices, ultimately resulting in better services to
the people. Accordingly all JnNURM mission cities are advised to undertake the process of
service level benchmarking. Service level performance indicators have been identified for
various areas like Quality and financial sustainability of public transport, Pedestrian / NMT
safety and infrastructure facilities, ITS facilities in a city to name a few, by the Ministry of
Urban Development (MoUD).
The Service level benchmarks (as per MoUD) for public transport system indicate the city
wide LOS provided by public transport system during peak hours. This would require
indicators such as presence of organized public transport system; bus route coverage, service
frequency, and percentage fleet as per urban bus specifications as far as the city perspective is
concerned. Therefore the parameters as per the MoUD guidelines to assess the service
initially were analysed for KGF.
The service level benchmarks for the Public transport consists of two categories:
1 Public transport facilities.
2 Sustainability of Public transport.
2.1
LOS 1
Presence of
Organized PT
2.1.1
>= 60
40 - 60
20 - 40
< 20
Extent of supply
availability of
public transport
>= 0.6
0.4 0.6
0.2 0.4
< 0.2
Therefore, LOS 2 = 4
LOS
3
Service
coverage of
public transport
>= 1
0.7 - 1.0
0.3 0.7
< 0.3
Therefore, LOS 3 = 4
% of fleet as
per urban bus
specification
75 - 100
50 - 74
25 - 49
<=25
LOS 4
Level of comfort
in
public
transport
<=1.5
1.5 2.0
2.0 2.5
>2.5
LOS 5
Average waiting
time for public
transport
<=4
4-6
6- 10
> 10
LOS
6
the
collected
secondary
data,
Operational
been calculated.
A =Revenue collections per annum from non-fare related
sources (From August 2012 to July 2013) (i.e.
excluding tariff box collections) Rs. 10.76
>40
40 20
20 10
<=10
LOS 2
<=5
5.5 8
8 10
>10
Therefore, LOS 2 = 1.
LOS 3
Operating Ratio
<0.7
0.7 1.0
1.0 - 1.5
>=1.5
Therefore, LOS 3 = 4.
2.3
In the above section, an overall evaluation of the city bus service has been made through the
computation of level of service prescribed by MoUD. In addition to this, a route wise
performance evaluation has been carried for KGF which is necessary to understand the travel
constraints in each route. This is essential as the constraint of one route may vary from the
other.
The following section lists out the route wise analysis (both with respect to passenger and
operators) for the better understanding of the overall operational efficiency of each route.
2.3.1 Route 201/202/203/204/205/206
This route is operated between KGF to Bangarapet to a total route length of 14 km.
A. Operational Efficiency-Passenger
1.
2.
3.
4.
44% of the commuters make through trips everyday i.e., from KGF to Bangarapet.
10
Operational Efficiency-Operators
Observations:
1. Cost of operation: The cumulative earning and cost
of operations for this route was found to be 25.45 and
33.5 respectively.
2. Load Factor: The load factor of 72.6% has been
recorded.
3. Trips per day: The approximate number of trips
made is 18 trips /day.
A. Inference
As this route required more buses as there is no IPT running on this route. There is a huge
demand of city buses as commuters prefer to catch city buses. The difference of EPKM and
CPKM are lesser, which can be improved by inducting more buses.
11
CONCLUSION
The quality of city bus services should be improved by working with city bus agencies to
introduce best practices in service planning operations and performance monitoring, thus
making city bus service the preferable alternative to private vehicle use.
In the case of KGF there is a high demand of buses on the entire route as commuter are
opting for city bus service to commute and there is no IPT runs on that route. it is suggested
to increase number of fleet on routes stated above in the chapter 1.
12
Male ():
Female ():
): Destination (
4. Origin (
):
...
5. Travel distance from Origin to Destination (
.
):
)?
Yes
No
)?
Yes
No
Route Information (
Lighting (
)
9. How much time do you wait for the bus at the bus stop? (
)?
< 5min
5-10min
10-15 min
15-30 min
Very good
(
Good
)
Normal
)
Bad
)
Very bad
(
)?
Weekdays ( )
Every day ()
(
12.
occasionally
)
Would you like any Routes to be added to the existing system? (
)?
Education ()
)?
Shopping ()
others
()
14. If not Public Transport, which is your next preferential mode of transport? (
,
)?
Auto
Private Bus
Others
15. What do you think must be done to increase the patronage of city bus service? (
)?
Satisfied (
(
Reduction in fare (
Infrastructure facility (
route coverage (
Reliability
)
Increase in
16. How many minutes do you walk to reach the Bus Stop: (
):
< 5min
5-10min
10-15 min
15-30 min
)
)
Directness of Service (
18. If not walking, which mode do you choose to reach bus stop: (
Two wheeler
others
Auto
Cycle
):
Private Bus
Walk
Cycles
(owned)
Other
Vehicles
(pl.specify)
21. Are you satisfied with the Current Bus fare system? (
?
Yes
No
22. If not, select the improvement required (
Reduction in fare (
)
Others (
25000/
ANNEXURE II
Total Eff. Kms
% Fleet Utilisation
Pass. Kms. (Lakhs)
Seat Kms. (Lakhs)
% Load Factor
Pass. Carried/bus on road/day
Gross Kms.(Lakhs)
Staff on Workshop &
Maintenance
Staff on Administration &
Accounts
Staff per bus on-road
Eff.kms per staff per day
Passenger Tax(in Lakhs)
Total Revenue
(paise/km)
% Cancel Kms
EPKM
Passenger per bus
Load Factor
Operational effeciency
KMPL
CPKM
Total Cost per Vehicle Kms
HSD Cost
Spare
Tyres and Tubes
Lubricants
Others
Dep on vehicle
MV Tax
Recondition
Staff
Dep / other assests
Central overhead
Interest
Mact
Miscellaneous
Cost
Margin
Net Profit
Turnover/Capital
Vehicle Kms performed litre of
fuel
Scheduled Kms/day
Operated Kms/day
Vehicle utilization (effective)
Vehicle utilization (Gross)
2. Extent of
Supply
Availability
of
Public
Transport
3. Service
Coverage
of Public
Transport
in the
city
>= 60
>= 0.6
>= 1
4.
Average
waiting
time for
Public
Transport
users
(mins)
<=4
5. Level
of
Comfort
in
Public
Transport
6. % of Fleet
as
per
Urban
Bus
Specification
<= 1.5
75 - 100
40- 60
0.4 - 0.6
0.7- 1
4-6
1.5 - 2.0
50 - 75
20 - 40
0.2 - 0.4
0.3 - 0.7
6 - 10
2.0 - 2.5
25 - 50
< 20
< 0.2
< 0.3
> 10
>2.5
<= 25
Overall Calculated
Comments
LOS
LOS
< 12
The City has a good public transport system which is wide spread
1
and easily available to the citizens. The system provided is
comfortable.
2
12 - 16
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.
17 - 20
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.
21-24
2. Staff /bus
ratio
< = 5.5
3.Operating
Ratio
<= 0.7
20 - 40
5.5 - 8.0
0.7 - 1
10- 20
8 - 10
1 - 1.5
< 10
> 10
> 1.5
Overall Calculated
Comments
LOS
LOS
<=4
The public transport of a city is financially sustainable.
1
2
5-7
8- 9
10 - 12