Author: Vanishree Herlekar

Co-Authors: Christopher Kost Jamie Osborne

The People’s Way:

Assessing the Janmarg BRT for inclusive design

Transed 2012

Presentation by: Pranjali Deshpande- Agashe

18 September 2012

Ahmedabad public transport status quo

Ahmedabad-BEFORE

Ahmedabad-BEFORE

Today…. “Janmarg”- People’s Way

TODAY

TODAY

Janmarg phase II

Key accessibility features of Janmarg• Level Boarding• At grade crossings• Trained drivers• Enclosed, well lit stations with seating• Access Ramps (1:12 gradient)• Tactile warnings at boarding gates• Map and route information in English and Gujarati• Auditory and visual announcements in stations

and buses

Components of accessibility

Access routes from surrounding area

Station/bus interface

Vehicle interior

ITDP’s study

‘Janmarg’ has access features

“Are they being used?”By whom?

Are they helpful?How to improve?

Methodology• Questionnaire survey to members of disabled

community (n=27*)– questions on travel behavior, preferred mode, and

experiences on public transport• User count at 5 Janmarg stations (appx 500/station)

– visual observation of the number of seniors, visually impaired, mobility impaired, and hearing impaired passengers

• Infrastructure audit (100m radius)– Bus interior (2 types of buses in the Janmarg system)– Stations and station precincts

User groups• Senior citizens• Persons with impaired mobility• Persons with impaired vision• Persons with impaired hearing

Questionnaire results• 51% had used public transport (past 6

months)– 100% prefer Janmarg over AMTS

• Common issues in using public transport:– “Route to the bus stop/station is unsafe” – “The buses are too full”– “No space to sit or rest”– “Buses do not stop at bus stops”

User count results

Andhjan Mandal

Narol Shivranjini RTO Anjali0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Visually impaired Mobility impairedMobility impaired on crutches/cane Mobility impaired on wheelchairsHearing impaired Seniors (above 60)

frac

tion

of u

sers

(%)

*

MaintenanceMaintenance

…

Station precinct audit

100m

Encroachments

ParkingPoor implementation

Maintenance

Lack of awareness

..

…

..

Methodology review…

User group identification

Questionnaire surveys

User counts

Infrastructure audits

Station design: what’s working

Access ramps (1:12 gradient)

At-grade crossings

Station design: what’s working

Level boarding: average gap width of 10-12 cm

Enclosed stations with seating and visual announcements

Station design: issues

Close placement of bollards at pedestrian crosssings

Position of light posts on access ramps and walkways

Conclusion• Access to the station• Participatory approach• Active disabled user testing while

implementing• High construction quality = Minimum

future maintenance• Coordination between different planning,

implementation and maintenance bodies

www.itdp.orgwww.twitter.com/itdpindia

www.facebook.com/itdpindia

Thank you