Sciencedirect

Available online at www.sciencedirect.
com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Transportation
Available Research
online Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000
at www.sciencedirect.com
Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 3129–3146
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2016 Shanghai. 10-15 July 2016
World Conference on Transport Research - WCTR 2016 Shanghai. 10-15 July 2016
Feeder Network Design for Mass Transit System in Developing
Feeder Network Design for Mass Transit System in Developing
Countries
Countries
(Case study of Lahore, Pakistan)
(Case study of Lahore, Pakistan)
Saadia Tabassuma*, Shinji Tanakab, Fumihiko Nakamurac, Ariyoshi Ryod

Saadia Tabassuma*, Shinji Tanakab, Fumihiko Nakamurac, Ariyoshi Ryod
a
Doctoral student, Graduate School of Urban Innovation, Yokohama National University, 79-5 Tokiwadai, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama,
a Kanagawa
Doctoral student, Graduate School of Urban Innovation, 240-8501,
Yokohama Japan
National University, 79-5 Tokiwadai, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama,
b
Associate Professor, Graduate School of Urban Innovation,
KanagawaYokohama National
240-8501, JapanUniversity,79-5 Tokiwadai, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama,
b Kanagawa
Associate Professor, Graduate School of Urban Innovation, 240-8501,
Yokohama JapanUniversity,79-5 Tokiwadai, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama,
National
c
Professor, Graduate School of Urban Innovation, Yokohama National
Kanagawa University79-5
240-8501, Japan Tokiwadai, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa 240-
c 8501, Japan
Professor, Graduate School of Urban Innovation, Yokohama National University79-5 Tokiwadai, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa 240-
d
Researcher, Graduate School of Urban Innovation, Yokohama National University79-5 Tokiwadai, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa 240-
8501, Japan
d 8501, Japan
Researcher, Graduate School of Urban Innovation, Yokohama National University79-5 Tokiwadai, Hodogaya-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa 240-
8501, Japan
Abstract
Abstract
Accessibility of a mass transit through regular system plays a key role in increasing the ridership of the main system. The access
Accessibility
and of to
egress trips a mass transit
and from thethrough regular
major transit system
system plays crucial
become a key role in increasing
in absence of anythe ridership
formal modeof the main
available forsystem.
feeder. The
Thisaccess
paper
and egressthe
evaluates trips to and from
existing feederthemodes
majoravailable
transit system become
for Bus Rapidcrucial
Transit in absence
System. of any formal
Current mode
public available
buses for feeder.
and paratransit areThis paper
analysed
evaluates the service
based on the existingarea
feeder modesand
coverage available
service for Bus attributes
quality Rapid Transit System. The
respectively. Current public
service buses are
attributes andworked
paratransit arebeanalysed
out to used as
based on theforservice
impedance feederarea coverage
design. and service
The study proposes quality attributesforrespectively.
the strategies feeder designThe service
using attributes
a gravity are worked out to be used as
model.
impedance for feeder design. The study proposes the strategies for feeder design using a gravity model.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2017 The under
Peer-review Authors. Published by
responsibility of Elsevier
WORLDB.V. CONFERENCE ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
Peer-review under responsibility of WORLD CONFERENCE ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
Keywords: Accessibility; feeder service; spatial analysis; travel impedance
Keywords: Accessibility; feeder service; spatial analysis; travel impedance
1. Introduction:
1. Introduction:
Achieving mobility by public transport, rather than by individual automobiles, is a worldwide accepted sustainable
Achieving mobility by public transport, rather than by individual automobiles, is a worldwide accepted sustainable
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +81-45-339-4031; fax: +81-45-331-1707.
* E-mail address:author.
Corresponding Tel.: +81-45-339-4031; fax: +81-45-331-1707.
tabassum-saadia-hv@ynu.jp
E-mail address: tabassum-saadia-hv@ynu.jp
2214-241X © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review©
2214-241X under
2017responsibility
The Authors.of WORLDby
Published CONFERENCE
Elsevier B.V. ON TRANSPORT RESEARCH SOCIETY.
2352-1465 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.343
3130 Saadia Tabassum et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 3129–3146
2 Saadia Tabassum / Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000
solution, for several transportation related issues. Today, various kinds of mass transit systems include, Bus Rapid
Transit System (BRTS), Metros, Commuter Rail, and Light Rail Transit that delineate in terms of cost, capacity, and
technology and some other features may include distance between stops, extent of right-of-way, operational regimes,
and guidance procedures. Among these, BRTS has shown that high quality public transit (which meets the needs of
the wider public) is neither costly nor extremely difficult to achieve. BRT is a system that has been replicated in cities
such as Quito, Bogotá, Jakarta and Beijing (to name a few). When measured in terms of economic, environmental and
social benefits, BRT’s track record provides a compelling case for more cities to consider it a transit priority.
Considering its advantages, the BRT system has become increasingly attractive in many developing cities in Asia.
However, a proper BRT development in these cities specifically involves many regional issues that mainly contribute
to the success of BRT implementation. The most successful BRT operating cities have been developed with a well-
designed city plan, integrating land use strategy with public transit and road networks (Satiennam et al., 2006).
However some of the BRT systems implemented have not achieved their expected targets. The poor performance has
been occasioned by increased motorization and poor land use planning. Further, higher commuting fares, poor
connectivity with other modes and difficulties associated with accessibility have also contributed to the dismal
performance (Akkarapol et al., 2009). To be more specific, Satiennam et al. (2006) proposed supporting strategies, to
make BRT system successful in developing countries, summarized in Table1.
As a result it can be fairly accepted that BRTS may not be the solution at all if not provided with the suitable measures
in the local context. The accessibility of the system by masses is one of the most important factors that can yield the
desired output as per expected. Therefore it is not enough to improve the trunk transit corridors, it is important to look
at the full travelling experience, and specially to the first and last kilometres and the connections among transport
modes (Juan et al., 2013).
1.1. Literature review and study goal
Agencies that provide mass transit services like BRTS should also pay close attention to the accessibility of the system.
The convenience of access influences passengers’ satisfaction of the systems and affects increasing or decreasing
ridership. It also encourages car users to be mass transit users and inspires non-regular mass transit users to be regular
mass transit users (Givoni et al., 2007 and Brons et al., 2009).To increase ridership, access from residential areas to
mass transit station should be improved in terms of physical environments and sense of security (Supaporn et al.,
2013). Similarly, Selmer and Hale (2010) explained that quality of passenger access to stations and egress to
destinations represents effectiveness of mass transit. It will also affect ridership and income of the system.
A trip using BRTS has two in-question sections: access to the station from origin (home etc.) and egress from the
station to the destination (workplace etc.). However in the cities where the BRTS corridor, runs through city centre
with high demand, the last section (from station to destination) is often feasible to be done by walk, under favourable
walking conditions and local environment. In any case, the mode options/ choices available for the first and the last
sections (in addition to the operational performance of the main system) certainly affect one’s decision for using the
system. Many developing countries that implemented BRTS have not provided any kind of systematic feeder service
to feed the main system. In low-income settings, such as Southeast Asia, BRT has been introduced partly to help
rationalize and formalize transit services, with informal micro and minibuses, either eliminated or
upgraded/redesigned, to play a complementary role, such as BRT-feeders. Long-standing private operators and
Table 1. Potential supporting strategies for successful BRTS

1. Integrating planning of land use and transportation system
2. Rapid transit operations High service level
Providing exclusive bus-ways
3. Entire network perspective Good route planning
Providing feeder network
Proving no competitive local service
4. Other conditions ITS application for operations
Marketing strategies
Saadia Tabassum et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 25 (2017) 3129–3146 3131
Saadia Tabassum/ Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 3
other incumbents have sometimes been removed as a necessary way to achieve economies of scale and financial
sustainability, with varying degrees of success, whereas highly atomize quasi-informal paratransit feeder services
continue to characterize BRT station areas in cities like Jakarta, Bangkok, Delhi and Lagos (Carvero, 2011). Access
to the system in different cities depends on transportation characteristics and network in the cities, locations of the
stations, and characteristics of land use around the stations, parking facilities at the stations and walking environments
around the stations (Supaporn et al., 2013). However in many developing countries, the access and the egress parts
are still critical due to the lack of the feeder service.
Generally, primary modes, that passengers use to access the stations, include auto access i.e. driving or being dropped-
off by cars, riding feeder buses, and using paratransit service and non-auto access i.e. walking and cycling, each has
own set of merits and demerits as shown in table 2 (Supaporn et al., 2013). However walking and bicycling access to
stations should be balanced with auto access in order to create multi-modal transit access systems (Replogle, 1992).
In this study, the significance of a systematic feeder service, over conventional public modes is highlighted. A regular
feeder service will improve the accessibility of the main system that will eventually raise the ridership by shifting
commuters from their private automobiles. The study explores the available feeders and their quality in terms of
service attributes as compared to BRTS. It also proposes the design of the feeder service using gravity model by setting
the particular impedance value in context of the local area.
Table 2 Various Access Modes for Mass Transit System

Auto access
Park and ride, kiss Access by cars is the most costly access mode for transit agencies.
and ride Land needed for parking spaces is expensive (Selmer and Hale, 2010).
Providing park-and-ride also wastes large land area, generates more traffic congestions at the area around the
stations.
Affects environments around the stations in terms of air and noise pollutions from cars (Supaporn et al., 2013).
Feeder bus A desirable option for passengers that live further than walking distance to transit stations, especially for those who
do not have private vehicles or cannot afford cost of parking at transit stations.
Generates less traffic congestion and emission.
However, providing feeder bus service is costly when it has to be time-competitive with cars, especially in low-
density areas where number of passengers is low (TCRP, 2009).
Paratransit According to paratransit’s function, many researchers recommended an integration of paratransit as a feeder for
public transit systems to enhance performance of urban transportation (Satiennam et al., 2006, Akkarapol et al.,
2009, Shimazaki et al, 1996 and Okada et al. 2003).
Provides flexible and easy connectivity and utilization of existing resources.
Existing services are Informal, not well organized and unsatisfactory, therefore commuters’ perception is important
in evaluating the possibility of paratransit as feeder (Akkarapol et al., 2009).
Non-Auto access
Improving non-motorized transit access i.e. bicycling and walking to mass transportation is one of the most cost-effective ways to improve
air quality and manage traffic congestion (FHWA, 1992).
Walking Limited to those who live 400-800m from the station (5 to 10 minutes’ walk)
Urban design, pedestrian facilities, crime and safety perceptions, and individual characteristics such as age and
gender affect walking decision (Supaporn et al., 2013).
Distance of walking distance and selection of transportation mode are affected by walking environment
(O’Sullivan & Morrall, 1996).
Cycling Limited to those who live within approximately 3 kms from the station
Improvement cycling access will increase number of passengers at low access-service costs for transit providers
(Supaporn et al., 2013).
However, wide quality of bicycle facilities, topography, weather, and bicycle culture can greatly affect the cycling
usage (TCRP, 2009).
1.2 Details of case study area

For the study purpose, Lahore is selected as the study area which is the second largest metropolitan city and the most
modern district of Punjab province. It is ranked 25 in the most populated urban areas of the world with population
density of 48 persons/ ha. During last five years the vehicle ownership rate has grown five times more than the
population growth rate of the city, resulting from 56 to 116 vehicles per1000 inhabitants. Based on these statistics,
city was in intense need of initiating a mass transit system that can attract and facilitate people more than that of their
private vehicles. In the city’s master plan, two most suitable corridors: Ferozepur Road (FPR) and Multan Road (MR),
were identified that required mass transit systems (Fig. 1). Therefore, based on these recommendations, in early 2013
BRTS was introduced on FPR, while work on MR is in progress. Other public transport services include public busses,
wagons and minibuses, auto rikshaws and motorcycle rikshaws (qingqis). The public transportation modes constitute
almost 20.1% of modal share (bus and wagon: 12.5%; rickshaws, taxi, 7.6%,... etc.) (JICA, 2011).
Furthermore, the city is sub divided into nine (9) towns and one cantonment area, among which six (6) towns including
cantonment area are fully urbanized and densely populated.
1.2.1. City’s BRTS

Bus Rapid Transit System (also termed as ‘Lahore Metro Bus) is the first time in the history of the country that
facilitates public by providing efficient, comfortable and luxurious travel, yet affordable too. It connects the two ends
of the city running from north to south in the midst of the city with the total length of 27 kilometres. The route covers
dozens of residential and commercial localities along the city’s main artery — Ferozepur Road, generating 27 stops
(after each kilometre) along its way. The whole operation of the system is based on Intelligent Transport System (ITS)
and managed by Punjab Metro Bus Authority (PMBA). The system currently operates a fleet of 86 buses moving with
an average speed of 26 km/h. The daily ridership of the system exceeds 140,000 passengers with peak hour ridership
being 10,000 passengers / hour / direction as claimed by officials. The Lahore Metro bus meets the criteria laid out by
the Institute for Transportation and Development Policy (ITDP). It has barrier-controlled, automated off-board fare
collection, a service interval of less than 2 minutes during peak hours, stations with well-designed signage and
information system and a precision bus docking system.
The expansion of the current corridor is also approved though yet to be constructed. Similar system is being
Legend
Multan Road (MR)
¬
(Å BRTS (FPR)
Lahore
<all other values>
Towns
1 Aziz Bhatti Town
2 Cantonment
3 Data Gunj Baksh Town
4 Gulberg Town
5 Iqbal Town
6 Nishtar Town
7 Ravi Town
8 Samanabad Town
9 Shalamar Town
10 Wagah Town
Fig. 1 Lahore City’s Mass Transit Corridors

constructed on the second potential corridor – Multan Road (MR). The replicas of this BRTS are also proposed in
other big cities of the country.
1.2.2 Current feeder modes

This section provides an overview of current auto access modes (only) excluding private vehicle:
In few areas public transport, comprised of mostly high occupancy buses, are being used as feeders. They run on the
main arteries of the city and hence have limited service areas. Only the commuters residing nearby the main roads can
avail these. They have fixed routes and stops, though not well designed. The incomplete routes, high fares, fewer
buses, gender discrimination and even the absence of buses on some routes are common (Muhammad et al., 2013).
Efficiency is acceptable on certain routes but reliability is poor, because there is no schedule at all. In addition to this,
these are poorly maintained, providing worse service quality.
Paratransit is found to be more frequent feeder mode. Currently, the city owns two types of paratransits: 1) Auto
rickshaw, and; 2) Motorcycle rickshaw. Auto rickshaws are hired only on demand and costly. They do not have fixed
routes and schedule and are mostly availed by females and old aged people. Their use as feeder is almost equal to
none, being much costly. However Motorcycle rickshaw has made much deeper inroads as feeder and is very common
in high density and low profile areas. (Therefore in this study the term paratransit will only deal with Motorcycle
rickshaws). Physically this vehicle consists of a body attached to the motorcycle and takes load of 6 persons at one
time. The concentration of these paratransit among vehicle mix, is multiplying day by day. These have fixed routes
but many are running on un-authorized routes due to lack of enforcement. Most of these are not even registered with
the transport authority and do not have any fitness certificate. High noise, bumpy and uncomfortable travelling, wild
and rage driving are the common observations. Not only this, the city’s environmental department also blames them
as responsible for 80% pollution (air and noise). Even though these harsh facts, they are emerging as feeders, being
flexible, faster and cheaper, in the absence of any other regular service.
2. Research Methodology and Data collection
At initial stage of the study, the need for starting a feeder service has been examined thoroughly. To verify the
consensus that current public transport (buses) is serving as feeders, a GIS based spatial analysis for service areas of
the existing public transport was done. For this purpose secondary type of data is used, mainly from master plan study
and the spatial analysis is performed using software ArcMap 10.3. To assess the current feeder modal share, primary
data is also collected and analysed. An interview field survey was conducted, for which: the respondents were BRTS
commuters, and so the survey locations were the BRTS stations (Fig. 2). The purpose of these surveys includes not
only to analyse the feeder modal share but also to examine their quality, as perceived by the users. Whereas the service
attributes were empirically selected in context of the local area that further paved the way towards a comparative
analysis between various available feeders. Some other significant inferences are also drawn based on the analysis
results. After evaluating the current feeder choices, strategies are proposed to initiate a feeder service. That mainly
includes: selection of areas for feeders based on certain factors, using an already proposed gravity-based model for
enhancing the accessibility of feeders, and working out travel impedance based on the survey results.
2.1 Questionnaire design and survey
For the interview survey, a questionnaire was designed consisting of two sections. In the first part, information about
one’s income class, vehicle ownership, frequency of using BRTS, and trip purpose were noted, whereas the next part
was about one’s feeder mode and perception towards its service quality. Assessment of the quality of current feeder
mode was done based on few service attributes using a five point Likert scale i.e. very good, good, fair, bad and very
bad. These service attributes include:
1) Service/ route reliability
2) Travel time
3) Travel cost/ fare
4) Comfort
5) Safety & Security
6) Environmental aspects (air & noise pollution etc.)

The survey was conducted during February, 2015 with the help of university under graduate students and 311 samples
were obtained.
3. GIS based Spatial Service Area Analysis
Since it is believed by the officials that existing public buses are well serving as feeders to the main line, therefore it
is compulsory to analyze them in this context. Not only has this, but to propose new feeder service, it is important to
evaluate the existing feeders. The presence or absence of a transit stop near one’s origin and destination is a key factor
in one’s choice to use transit (feeder). When stop is not available, other aspects of public transit service do not matter
for given trip (Vimal et al., 2013). Therefore this evaluation is based on the stop coverage/ service area analysis.
Whereas service area of a transit stop, is the area within that one can access/ reach the bus stop through walking.
Spatial location of a transit stop is very important to estimate how many people can use the given transit service.
There are almost 30 planned bus routes in the city excluding BRTS, as shown by the bus route map developed by
Lahore Transport Company (Fig. 3).
[However some sources (Punjab Gazette 2006) show 53 or 44 planned bus routes, but most of these routes are not
operational or closed so far. The operation of wagons has also been limited to very few areas].
For this study, only those bus routes are targeted that start/end/cross/move alongside for few miles, to the BRTS, and
hence can be used (as feeders). Almost 23 bus routes, creating 146 bus stops, are identified that interact with the BRTS
corridor in some way. A GIS based map is prepared to show the location of these bus stops relative to the main system
(Fig. 4a). A spatial analysis is performed for each bus stop including the main line, by creating a radial buffer zone of
500m, assuming that 500m is a feasible walking distance, given that the overall walking environment is feasible (Fig.
4b).
Selected Ravi
BRTS stations road stop
Janazzgah
stop
Gaddafi
stop
Walton
stop
Nishter
stop
Fig. 2 Target Field Survey locations

Based on the spatial analysis the percent area with access and without access i.e. inside and outside the service area
of a stop is calculated for each town. However the distribution of population is not uniform within any town, therefore
number of people with access and without access is also measured separately.
3.1 Discussion
The spatial analysis shows that most of the residents of each town are not within the service area of any bus stop
(Figure 5). The percentage of residents with access is far less for few towns like, Iqbal, Shalamar, and Aziz Bhatti
whereas for Wagah it is reduced to zero. However since 80% of the city’s population lives within 8 km from the city
centre, therefore Wagah and Iqbal towns can be waived off, being most of their parts far from the city centre. Among
rest of the towns, Data GB and Samanabad are the two, in which more than 50% of the population can access a bus
stop and thus can use BRTS further. For other four towns the percentage of residents with access varies between 37
to 47 percent. Overall 33% city’s residents can either use public transport (bus) as feeder or they live within walking
distance from the nearby BRTS station.
[The buffer analysis in GIS is based on Euclidian distance and not on actual street network, since the information on
the exact residence or location of individuals is not available. Whereas in reality pathways may be longer and may
result in more percentage population without access.]
4. Field Survey Results and Discussion
4.1 Socio-economic: characteristics and impact towards BRTS use
The respondents of field interview survey have certain socio-economic characteristics. Among these, only 7% female
Fig. 3 Lahore Bus Route Map

Legend
Multan Road (MR)
Stops_buffer
!( Stops
Road_Network
(Å
¬ BRTS (FPR)
BRT_Buffer
Lahore
<all other values>
Towns
Aziz Bhatti Town
Cantonment
Data Gunj Baksh Town
Gulberg Town
Iqbal Town
Nishtar Town
Ravi Town
Samanabad Town
Shalamar Town
Wagah Town
Fig. 4 (b) Spatial Analysis map

Fig. 4 (a) Bus stop location relative to BRTS
created in ArcGIS
were interviewed. This is not only due to their lesser and limited travel activities but also their reluctance towards the
interview. Majority of the respondents belonged to low income group (54%) and so owned no vehicle (56%). The
frequency of using BRTS was also asked and found that 49% respondents use BRTS on daily basis. Almost 66 %
respondents had ‘Work’ as the trip purpose. Further distribution of these socio economic characteristics is given in
Table 4.
These socio economic features were tested against frequency of using BRTS, to infer the in between impact/
relationship. Based on the Gender category, no further inference is made, due to the negligible variation in the sample.
For the purpose of examining the relationships between Income level, vehicle ownership and trip purpose towards
frequency of using BRTS, Pearson chi-square tests were conducted. The test results of income level vs. frequency of
using BRTS, and, vehicle ownership vs. frequency of using BRTS revealed that there were no in between relationships/
associations, since the level of significance i.e. p-value (  ) is greater than that of set for the sample (5%)(Table 5).
However significant relationship is found between trip purposes vs. frequency of using BRTS (Chi square value =
59.08, df = 8, p (  ) < 0.05). The strength of relationship/ association is further measured by the value of Crammer’s
V and that is 0.31 for this case which indicates strong relation. According to cross tabulation results, 70.6% daily
BRTS users have ‘Work’ as the trip purpose. Hence a significant larger proportion of respondents owing ‘Work’ as
trip purpose is found dominantly to be more frequent BRTS user than others. This result might be obvious, since the
corridor offers direct access to several offices, activity centres, and hubs having high employment opportunities.
4.2 Modal share for access/egress
The modal share in the study is calculated based on the mode opted for access and egress trips. As per the survey
results, walk and paratransit are the prevailing feeder modes. Fig. 6 illustrates the distribution of different existing
feeder modes.
100%
90%
80%
Popul
-ation
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
Area
20%
10%
0%
% Area with Access % Area without Access

% Population with Access % Population without Access
Fig. 5 Percent Area & Population with/without Access
Only 8-10 % BRTS commuters use public transport as feeder: 8% for access and slightly more 10% for egress.
Generally people make access trip from their residence, and public transport offers poor coverage to most of the
residents (as discussed before).
Another mode used to access is the private vehicle, for which the share (1-3%) is even lesser than that of public
transport, despite the fact that most of the BRTS stations are provided with park and ride facilities. Officials termed;
‘lack of awareness among motorists’ is the main reason behind failure of these park and ride sites. However a study
done by the university graduate students, shows that due to the absence of any regular feeder service for the egress
trip, private vehicle owners, do not tend to use BRTS, while using their own vehicle to access. Not only this,
Muhammad et al. (2013) performed a cross analysis, to show that people having car or motorcycle prefer to use their
private vehicle instead of any other mode due to inefficient public transportation.
Paratransit is found to be the most opted feeder, after walking. For the access trip almost 39% and for the egress 31%
people use paratransit. In case of access trip, higher percentage indicates the fact that most of the residents are deprived
of public transport. While for egress trip, due to the direct access to many activity centres, this percentage falls by 8%.
Overall the higher percentage towards paratransit is due to its flexible nature, temporal and spatial coverage.
Walking has lion’s share among all the feeders. For the access case 50% and for egress almost 58% people use walking.
Further information of these walk trips reveals that all these walkers have their origin or/and destination within 500m
or 1 km from the BRTS line.
A closer examination of the survey sample has shown that the percentage of commuters using Walking for the egress
trip is highest for those who use paratransit for the access trip. This trend points to the fact that commuters are not
willing to travel larger distances, for which they have to use some automobile for both access and egress parts. Also
the BRTS corridor, that provides direct access to all purpose areas, makes walking feasible for the egress trip.
None of the person interviewed, used ‘Others’ that deals with ‘feeder service provided by the office’.
Table 3 Socio Economic Characteristics’ of Survey Respondents

Gender Frequency of using BRTS
92.9
49.2
23.8
27
7.1
Daily Once Rarely
Male Female per
week
Income Level (PKR :Pakistani Rupees) Trip purpose

54.7
66.2
24.1
19.9
18
6.4
4.8
4.5
1.3
0 / No Less 2 1 ,0 0 0 5 1 ,0 0 0
income than – –
20,000 50,000 100,000
or more
Vehicle ownership
56.3
31.8
2.9
9
4.3 Evaluation of Paratransit as feeders
The integration of paratransit as feeder mode is recommended by many researchers (Satiennam et al., 2006, Akkarapol
et al., 2009, Shimazaki et al., 1996 and Okada et al., 2003). The concept is to enhance the mobility, utilizing the
existing resources. However the perception of people towards using paratransit should be carefully evaluated. The
service quality of the existing paratransit needs to be assessed so that it may be improved and modified afterwards.
The current paratransit is quite informal and unsatisfactory, while many run illegally without any route permit.
In this study, paratransit is evaluated based on the service quality. The attributes selected for this purpose, relate
directly with the quality of the service. A comparison of these six service attributes is shown in the Fig. 7, for access
and egress trips. Almost the same trend is observed for access and egress. In the absence of any other regular and
better service, commuters have to do trade-off between all the attributes. The service attributes like Comfort, Safety
& Security, and Environmental aspects are found to be the most dissatisfied by the users. These critical service
attributes, somehow are more associated with the physical and mechanical part of the vehicle (being used as
paratransit). Increase in paratransit’s safety and comfort, and working out with the environmental aspects (mainly
Table 4 Chi-Square Test Results

Social Income class vs. Frequency of using BRTS
Value df Asymp. Sig.
(2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 3.398 6 .757
Likelihood Ratio 3.409 6 .756
Linear-by-Linear Association .444 1 .505
N of valid cases 311
Vehicle Ownership vs. Frequency of using BRTS
Linear-by-Linear Association .094 1 .759
Trip Purpose vs. Frequency of using BRTS
Linear-by-Linear Association 30.435 1 .000
Symmetric Measures
Values Approx. Sig.
Nominal by Nominal Phi 0.436 .000
Crammer’s V 0.308 .000
lowering the noise pollution) will increase the commuters’ satisfaction (Akkarapol et al., 2009).However point should
be noted that improving the quality of current paratransit will increase the satisfaction of the current users but will
hardly attract the private vehicle users. Thus to encourage the commuters towards using BRTS, need for having a
regular feeder service in the form of small bus/shuttle, matching the quality of main BRTS (to whom it is feeding to)
is undeniable. The ultimate goal should be to improve the whole travelling experience from origin to final destination.
5. Strategies for feeder network design
5.1 Potential feeders’ areas/towns selection
Starting a feeder service is not so straight forward, since the riders are spatially randomly distributed over the towns.
It is absolutely necessary to look for the areas/ towns that are in most need of it. The feeder service must go through
the areas that can generate the potential riders. The selection of areas for initially starting a feeder service cannot be
Fig. 6 Current Modal Share for Feeder (Access & Egress)

done only on the basis of percent of population with/without access (Figure 5). Other land use factor should also be
carefully worked out and considered in this regard.
Among all the landuse factors population density tends to have the greatest attention when it comes to start a transit
service, though it is someway linked with the other landuse factors like regional accessibility, network connectivity,
landuse mix etc. (Todd Litman, 2014). The use of alternative modes than private vehicle increases with the increased
density. The information about the population density is more significant for starting a feeder service, where in-vehicle
travel time and as a result overall cycle length (feeder service length or time required to complete one cycle) is more
critical to passengers. Table 6 shows the population density for each town. Iqbal, Nishter and Wagah towns have much
lesser density than that of others, due to their larger size. Consequently their respective population without access is
much higher. For such cases, a useful factor is measure of the population distribution using Gini coefficient (G) (Eq.
1).
1 ∑n
i=1(n+1−i)yi
G= [n + 1 − 2 ∑n
] (1)
n i=1 yi
Where; n = number of zone and y = density
Higher value of G represents greater variation in population distribution within the town, whereas lower G value
shows uniform distribution. If the towns like Iqbal, Nishter and Wagah, (that have lesser density & more population
without access), have higher G value, (means non uniform distribution of population) then these can be provided with
the feeder service by actually observing their respective populated areas. In that case feeder will not have much longer
time too, since it will run only through certain dense parts of the town, not the whole town. The population density of
Aziz bhatti town and Cantonment area are also relatively lesser. However, 95 % Aziz bhatti’s population without
access can be facilitated with the feeder service by identifying the denser zones of the towns. As higher G value shows
that population is not uniformly distributed over the town. There must be some areas/zones within the town, having
high density while the other may be vacant. As far as the cantonment area is concerned, it is resided by army officials
and so has limited access points and routes due to security concerns.
The other towns: Ravi, Samnabad, Data GB, Shalamar, Gulberg, have higher population density and should be fairly
considered to be served by feeders. The area of these towns is not so large, depending on the distribution of population
(which is more uniform here), feeder routes can be further worked out with an ease, serving maximum town’s
population.
Environmental Aspect
Safety and Security

Very bad
Comfort Bad
Fair
Travel Cost/ Fare
Good
Travel Time
Very good
Service/ route Reliablity
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Fig. 7 Service Quality Attributes’ Comparison

Table 5 Towns’ Population Density and G-value

Sr. No. Area Population Density Percentage population G
Town
(sq. km) (‘000) (persons/ ha) without access
1 Ravi 31 1007 328 59.96 0.46
2 Samnabad 38 984 262 44.01 0.40
3 Data GB 31 970 317 41.85 0.38
4 Iqbal 520 960 18 80.56 0.51
5 Nishtar 497 945 19 62.26 0.59
6 Shalamar 24 854 350 89.69 0.52
7 Cantonment 98 831 85 57.70 0.38
8 Gulberg 44 778 178 52.72 0.30
9 Aziz bhatti 69 667 97 95.16 0.68
10 Wagah 440 656 15 100.00 0.56
5.2 Feeders’ accessibility
After selecting the areas for feeders that can give potential demand, the accessibility of feeders in terms of feeder
lengths, number of feeder stops and in between spacing, using an existing model is worked out.
A feeder network design requires a vigilant planning as the basic purpose of feeder service is to make the main system
accessible, by providing an efficient in between mode to most of the users. A low number of stops would definitely
deprive some population which would eventually lower the accessibility of main system. However increasing the
number of stops will increase the accessibility by serving larger population but simultaneously increase the in-vehicle
travel time (and also the overall cycle length of feeder service) for some passengers and thus may render the service
unattractive and not feasible for those. This phenomenon is shown through a gravity-based potential accessibility
model (Eq. 2) proposed by Zhu et al. (2004).
𝐴𝐴𝑗𝑗
𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 = ∑𝑗𝑗 𝛽𝛽 , i = 1, 2, ……..m; j = 1,2, …….n (2)
𝑇𝑇𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖
Where 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 = potential accessibility of destination i, 𝐴𝐴𝑗𝑗 = attraction from origin j,

Tij = impedance between origin j and destination i, β = impedance decay factor,
And m & n = number of destinations and origins respectively.
In this case, the feeder stops can be considered origin and destination is the main system (BRTS) stop. The impedance
can take any form that affects accessibility like travel time, travel cost, fuel cost etc., where β is impedance decay
factor which further dictates the effect size of the impedance over accessibility. Shailesh et al. (2013) used the set up
and corresponding equations for fixed route transit policy for a feeder service which was proposed by Quadrifoglio et
al. (2009). Based on these equations, he further proposed an accessibility expression (Eq. 3) for a rectangular service
area (W×L) divided into (N – 1) number of zones, all of equal area with each feeder trip beginning from the transfer
point or terminal 1 and ending at the same terminal (Fig. 9). Each stop is located at constant spacing of distance d
from each other. The stop location is walk able within the given service area and so can be accessed. Population
residing within d/2 distance can access the main service through walk and so not included further.
ρWd(N−1)
PFRT = β (3)
N d γ
[( )( +t)+ (W+d)]
2 V 4Vwk
Where PFRT = potential accessibility of fixed route transit feeder service

ρ= demand density of rectangular service area (assumed to be uniform)
W = service area width, N = number of feeder stops, d = spacing between the stop
V = average speed of feeder, t = dwell time of feeder at each stop,
Vwk =average walking speed of passengers, γ = walking weight value and β = impedance decay factor
The accessibility will be increased by increasing the number of stops. However the number of stops should be
optimized as per accessibility, called optimal number of stops. The equation for optimal number of stops (N*) was
also worked out as (Shailesh et al., 2013):
γ
(W+d)
2Vwk
β+ [ 𝑑𝑑 ]
(𝑉𝑉+𝑡𝑡)
N = N∗ = (β−1)
(4)
Based on the findings of the previous research, a chart is built using the equations 2 & 3. The other values are assumed
as per the local area considerations. The speed of feeder is taken as 30 km per hour, which is as per local residential
areas. Some other assumptions include; an average walking speed of 4.3 km per hour, the halt time at each stop is 3
minutes, width of the service area is 1 km and the distance between two stops is 1 km. Walking weight is kept 1.7
which is found quite appropriate for an urban transit bus operations (Wardman, 2004). Although walking weight could
differ much according to the local walking environment. The number of bus stops further dictates the length of feeder
service (kilometres), since the distance between each stop is kept constant as 1 km. The feeder service will start/end
at BRTS, which itself lies in the city centre. However the spatial distribution of population is within 8-10 km from the
city centre, therefore it is needed to limit the number of stops or feeder length at a certain impedance decay factor.
Though following the road network paths may result in longer feeder length for some areas. As per the developed
chart in Figure 8, increasing impedance decay factor results in lower number of stops and thus low value of
accessibility (PFRT). Since at β = 1 accessibility (number of stops) is infinite, so to achieve a certain accessibility level,
an increase in β (from 1) is desirable till the accessibility is achieved. After getting the desired accessibility level,
further increase in β value will have a negative impact on accessibility and thus will reduce it. Feeders can be designed
using this model for the towns with more or less uniform population distribution (Ravi, Samnabad, Data GB, Shalamar
& Gulberg) by knowing the appropriate walking weight for each area.
5.3 Impedance decay factor
In the above model the value of Impedance decay factor is critical to measure. In most of the cases it is generally
calculated from the historical travel time data and mostly transit agencies have certain available decay factor. But for
the study area, authorities lack of providing any such data. The reason is: all the current bus routes, locations and route
lengths, are merely designed on the availability of road network, going through arterials, serving the hubs and
operator’s own interest.
For the study, the service quality attributes which were measured during the survey are proposed to be used, as travel
impedance (Eq. 5).
Travel impedance = Service/ route Reliability (SR) + Travel Time (TT) + Travel Cost (TC) + Comfort (C) + Safety
&Security (SS) + Environmental aspects (E (5)
Fig. 8 Feeder Service Policy

Each of the above attribute has certain share or degree of effect, which is termed as ‘weight’ here (Eq. 6). In order
to assess these weights, weighted criteria is used in which the technique of proportional scoring is applied for each
attribute.
Travel impedance = w × (SR) + w × (TT) + w ×TC) + w ×(C) + w ×SS) + w× (E) (6)
The percentage of respondents who answered ‘bad’ or ‘very bad’ is measured against each attribute (average for access
and egress). Based on the results, it is assumed that 20 is the least desirable respondents’ percentage, to be used as
impedance and 70 is the most desired outcome percentage, for each attribute. As per the proportional scoring method,
these 20 and 70 are being used as lower and upper limits respectively for each attribute. The ratio of the ‘difference
between respondents’ percentage and lower limit (20)’ and ‘difference between upper limit (70) and respondents’
percentage’ is used as the weight for that attribute. The purpose is to get an appropriate weight value for each attribute
(Eq. 7).
Travel impedance = 1.88 × (SR) + 1.69 × (TT) + 1.29 ×TC) + 6.81 ×(C) + 4.15 ×SS) + 4.78× (E) (7)
The analysis of these attributes reveals that: travel time and cost which are most commonly and frequently considered
travel impedance, are not much significant and commuters are more concerned about other attributes like comfort,
safety and environmental aspects (Fig.9). This is due to the fact that current feeder modes offer worst of these attributes
but own lesser fare and high mobility. Equation 7 shows that for feeder trips the value of travel impedance should
take the effect of all the attributes used in the study.
In order to calculate the value that could be further used in the design, the slope of the plot shown in Figure 9 is used.
Most researchers calculated the value of travel impedance using the travel time data, since travel time is considered
to be typical form of travel impedance. The slope of the plot between percentages of trip volume versus travel time
gives the impedance parameter. However for the study some other impedance came out to be more prominent than
the travel time. Therefore rather than using the typical approach, the impedance is calculated as slope after aligning
80 2500
70
2000
60
β vs N*
50 β vs PFRT
1500
PFRT
40
N*
30 1000
20
500
10
0 0
0 1 2 3 4
β
Fig. 9 Variation of Optimal number of Stops and Accessibility with Impedance Decay Factor
the attributes according to their corresponding weights in Figure 9. The value of travel impedance is calculated from
the plot, by measuring the slope of the line, which comes out to be 1.12 (Fig. 9). This value can give optimal number
of stops from the plot shown in Figure 8 which is 9 stops for this impedance value. This approach takes the effect of
more pronounced impedances rather than the typical ones.
6. Results and Implications
This study explores the role of current public busses and informal paratransit as feeders to highlight the need of new
regular feeder service for BRTS. The existing available feeder mode choices are thoroughly analysed. It is found that
BRTS users mainly belong to low income group, and so own no private vehicle. The reason is concluded as the current
traveling scenario (absence of regular feeders and use of paratransit instead) is hard to compromise for private vehicle
users. Only the unavailability of the vehicle at the time of need and one’s inability to drive, make the private vehicle
users travel publically.
Further majority of BRTS users (more than 50%) are those who live nearby and can access or/and egress by walk,
since no regular feeders are available to connect the BRTS with farther areas. Among existing feeder choices public
buses offer poor coverage, only 33% population can use them, compromising other associated crucial aspects e.g.
availability of the service at the time of need, travel cost, travel time, comfort level, safety & security and other
environmental aspects. The other mode is unprivileged paratransit, offering crucial travel impedance in the form of
comfort, safety and environmental aspects. Improvement strategies should be introduced before using paratransit
including current design of the vehicle, which must be evaluated by the experts, making it safer, comfortable and noise
free.
The study suggests a regular feeder service in the form of small bus other than paratransit or conventional public bus.
However the length and location of the service should be carefully designed as described. Since the regular feeder bus
y = 1.1178x - 0.4758
70 R² = 0.9203 8
N = 311
60 7
6
50
5
Weights
40
4
% Response
30
3
20
2
10 1
0 0
% Responses Weights Linear (Weights)

Fig. 9 Comparative Analysis of Service Attributes w.r.t. Weights
does not has demerits as that of paratransit, provided that it offers more access to maximum residents than that of
conventional public bus. The study also proposes the design considerations for a feeder service in terms of areas
selection and feeder service length. It is worked out that initially the towns having more uniform distribution of
population must be served by feeders. Later the larger towns with non-uniform distribution of population should be
considered by observing the actual landuse pattern and identifying denser parts of the town. It is further assessed that
for feeder trips, travel impedance varies from the typical ones to some others like comfort, safety and environmental
aspect. The effect of these travel impedance through proportional scoring is introduced to decide the optimal number
of feeder stops. The length of the feeder service/ number of stops should result in maximum accessibility in an efficient
way. Optimal number of stops based on impedance decay factor must be estimated for each town that has uniform
distribution of population.
7. Conclusions
In this study, the significance of a regular feeder system to enhance the accessibility of mass transit system is
highlighted through evaluating the current feeders. It is concluded that use of conventional transport system as feeder
mode will not be pleasing at all; particularly in developing countries where conventional public transport is stagnant
and offers quite poor service in terms of coverage and comfort. The perception of commuters regarding these current
feeders also unfolds the reason behind, no use of BRTS by private vehicle users, though it provides quite comfortable,
efficient and safer travel. The standard of current feeders is almost impossible to compromise for private vehicle users
and therefore cannot attract other income class groups than low income class (who have no other choice). It is further
concluded the well recommended approach of ‘integrating paratransit as feeder to utilize the existing resources’, is
underwhelming in the local context. The most dissatisfied attributes are more or less associated with physical (body)
and mechanical (engine) aspects of the vehicle and can be fairly resolved by replacing the vehicle with a low capacity
bus/shuttle. A feeder bus service will definitely offer better riding quality and generate lesser environmental hazards.
The direct access to several employment hubs form BRTS corridor makes it a preferred mode choice, as commuters
can make their egress trip by walk only. Therefore provision of a regular feeder from the origin point (mainly
residential) can substantially attract more riders. However in order to make it time competitive, vigilant planning is
required. The route and schedule of feeders that yield minimum travel delay, must be carefully worked out and
maintained. Based on the results it is concluded that not only the population density but the distribution of population
within an area must be pre considered and evaluated. An area/town with non-uniform population distribution will
result in longer feeder cycle length and vice versa. As per the analysis results, it is also highly recommended that
existing public transport/buses must be redesigned/ realigned to increase coverage.
Although this study fairly supports the regular feeder service in the form of small bus, but still there is a need of more
justification prior to initiate such service. In future other factors including commuters’ willingness to use and pay for
new feeder bus should also be inquired and discussed. Moreover, prior to initiating feeders, other landuse factors like
landuse mix, road network, available right of way and connectivity should also be evaluated.
10. Reference
Akkarapol T., Fumihiko N., T. O., 2009. Influences of Paratransit as A Feeder of Mass Transit System in Developing Countries Based on Commuter
Satisfaction, Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.8
Brons, M., Givoni, M. Rietveld, P., 2009. Access to Railway Stations and its Potential in Increasing Rail Use, Transport Research Part A 43, pp.
136-149
Cervero, R. 2011. State roles in providing affordable mass transport services for Low-Income Residents. Paris, Organisation for Economic
Development/International Transport Forum, Discussion Paper 2011-17.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 1992. Linking Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities with Transit. National Bicycle and Walking Study Case
Study No. 9. U.S. Department of Transport.
Givoni, M., Rietveld, P., 2007.The Access Journey to the Railway Station and its Role in Passengers’ Satisfaction with Rail Travel, Transport
Policy, Vol. 14, pp. 357-365
Japan international Cooperation Agency (JICA), 2011. Lahore Urban Transport Master Plan in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Vol. I
Juan, C., M., Darío, H., 2013. Workshop 2: Bus rapid transit as part of enhanced service provision, Research in Transportation Economics 39,
pp. 104-107
Muhammad A. J., Toshiyuki O., Fumihiko N., R. W., 2013. Comparison of Commuters' Satisfaction and Preferences with Public Transport: A
Case of Wagon Service in Lahore, Jordan Journal of Civil Engineering, Volume 7, No. 4, pp. 461-472
Okada H., Doi K., Gaabucayan, Ma.S.A., Hosomi A., 2003. Quantification of Passengers’ Preference for Improvement of Railway Stations
Considering Human Latent Traits: A Case Study in Metro Manila, Journal of Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 7, 1806-
1819.
O’Sullivan, S., Morrall, J., 1996. Walking distances to and from light-rail transit stations. Transportation Research Record 1538, pp. 19–26
Quadrifoglio, L., Li, X., 2009. A methodology to derive the critical demand density for designing and operating feeder transit services,
Transportation Research, Part B: Methodological 43, pp. 922–935.
Replogle, M., 1992. Bicycle Access to Public Transportation: Learning from Abroad. Institute for Transportation Engineers Journal, pp. 15-21
Satiennam, T., Fukuda, A., Oshima R., 2006. A Study on the Introduction of Bus Rapid Transit System in Asian Developing Cities: A Case
Study on Bangkok Metropolitan Administration Project, Journal of International Association of Traffic and Safety Sciences, Vol.30, No.2, pp.
59-69.
Semler, C., Hale, C., 2010. Rail Station Access – an assessment of options, 33rd Australian Transport Research Forum Conference, Canberra
Shailesh C., Muhammad E. B., Prem C. D., Sharada V., 2013. Accessibility evaluations of feeder transit services, Transportation Research Part
A: Policy and Practice 52, pp. 47–63
Shimazaki, T and Rahman, Md.M. (1996) Physical characteristics of paratransit in developing countries of Asia: Transportation in Asia-Pacific
Countries. (Volume 1), Journal of Advanced Transportation, Vol.30, No.2, pp. 5-24.
Supaporn, K., L., Salila, T., Supanita, M., 2013. Improving Access to a Mass Transit Station in Suburb of Bangkok, Proceedings of the Eastern
Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol.9
Todd Litman, 2014. Land Use Impacts of Transport, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org)
Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP). (2009). TCRP Web-only Document 44: Literature Review for Providing Access to Public
Transportation Stations. Transit Cooperative Research Program, Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, Washington,
D.C.
Vimal, G., B.L.Swami, M. P., P. K., 2013. Availability and Accessibility Assessment of Public Transit System in Jaipur City, International
Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol.1, No.2, pp. 81-91
Wardman, M., 2004. Public transport values of time. Transport Policy 11 (4), pp. 363–377.
Zhu, X., Liu, S., 2004. Analysis of the impact of the MRT system on accessibility in Singapore using an integrated GIS tool. Journal of Transport
Geography 12, pp. 89–101.

Sciencedirect

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sciencedirect

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Available online at www.sciencedirect.

Saadia Tabassuma*, Shinji Tanakab, Fumihiko Nakamurac, Ariyoshi Ryod

2352-1465 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

1.1. Literature review and study goal

Table 1. Potential supporting strategies for successful BRTS

Table 2 Various Access Modes for Mass Transit System

1.2 Details of case study area

1.2.1. City’s BRTS

Fig. 1 Lahore City’s Mass Transit Corridors

1.2.2 Current feeder modes

2. Research Methodology and Data collection

2.1 Questionnaire design and survey

6) Environmental aspects (air & noise pollution etc.)

3. GIS based Spatial Service Area Analysis

Fig. 2 Target Field Survey locations

4. Field Survey Results and Discussion

4.1 Socio-economic: characteristics and impact towards BRTS use

Fig. 3 Lahore Bus Route Map

Fig. 4 (b) Spatial Analysis map

4.2 Modal share for access/egress

% Area with Access % Area without Access

Fig. 5 Percent Area & Population with/without Access

Table 3 Socio Economic Characteristics’ of Survey Respondents

Income Level (PKR :Pakistani Rupees) Trip purpose

4.3 Evaluation of Paratransit as feeders

Table 4 Chi-Square Test Results

5. Strategies for feeder network design

5.1 Potential feeders’ areas/towns selection

Fig. 6 Current Modal Share for Feeder (Access & Egress)

Where; n = number of zone and y = density

Safety and Security

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Fig. 7 Service Quality Attributes’ Comparison

Table 5 Towns’ Population Density and G-value

5.2 Feeders’ accessibility

Where 𝑃𝑃𝑖𝑖 = potential accessibility of destination i, 𝐴𝐴𝑗𝑗 = attraction from origin j,

Where PFRT = potential accessibility of fixed route transit feeder service

5.3 Impedance decay factor

Fig. 8 Feeder Service Policy

Travel impedance = w × (SR) + w × (TT) + w × TC) + w ×(C) + w × SS) + w× (E) (6)

6. Results and Implications

% Responses Weights Linear (Weights)

You might also like

Travel impedance = w × (SR) + w × (TT) + w ×TC) + w ×(C) + w ×SS) + w× (E) (6)