Rumana Islam Sarker

1. How far people are willing to walk to public transport? A case study in Munich CityWalk21,Vienna22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker Research Assistant, Institute for Infrastructure Engineering, Unit for Intelligent Transportation Systems, University of Innsbruck, Austria

2. Outline of the presentation • Introduction • Methodology • Characteristics of the respondents • Findings • Conclusion and recommendation Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

3. Introduction Source: Werner,2011 SWM/MVG Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

4. Introduction Nahverkehrsplan der Landeshauptstadt München, 2005 Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker Wikitravel, 2015

5. Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker How far people are willing to walk for different local public transport modes?

6. Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

7. Introduction • According to the ‚Local public transport plan for the city of Munich’ it is assumed that : • Lower urban density leads to bigger catchment area • People walk farther to a subway/suburban train than to a tram/bus • Are these assumptions true? • What are the reasons which influence the decision of choosing a route? Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

8. Methodology • Selection of the station • The whole Munich region is divided into 16 rings and 4 zones which are called MVV (MünchnerVerkehrs- und Tarifverbund) region. • Categories (based on the transport lines plan of Munich for MVV area): • Inner city area • Residential and Commercial area with different route/mode choice • Mostly suburban area with least mode of transport • *Transport Lines are written according to MVV network and stations are chosen with the consult of supervisor • * Nightlines are excluded from the analysis Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

9. Methodology: Data collection process Intercept survey • Paper based questionnaire First part: • Actual and accepted walking time to reach the station • The reasons behind the choice of the route • Travel purpose and mobility pattern (ticket,driving license,car occupancy) Second part: • Socio-demographic questions (age, gender, occupation etc.) Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

10. Methodology: Data collection plan • Survey is conducted within the period of April-May 2014 for 180 hours. • Performance of the survey is planned to conduct from 8:00 am till 18:00 pm with minimum 3 respondents/hour to achieve the goal of 500 respondents. re-arranged plan: 6 hours/day • The survey is conducted also in weekends and holidays to monitor different travel patterns and trip purpose. • Data analysis • All the result is transferred for the analysis to the statistical software ‘SPSS 22’ (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) • The catchment area analysis is performed with the network analyst tool of ArcGIS 10.1 Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

11. Characteristics of the respondents Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

12. Characteristics of the respondents : By mode • X 30 was taken in to consideration not to compare with other modes but to observe the reception of this new line among the respondents Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

13. Findings: Lower urban density leads to a bigger catchment area Residential/commercial area with different route/mode choice (ex: Neuperlach süd) Inner city (ex: Sendlinger Tor) 240 Respondents who provided exact address among 500 respondents are included in this analysis Mostly suburban area with least mode of transport (ex: Ismaning) Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

14. Findings: Lower urban density leads to a bigger catchment area Category 2 Category 1 Category 3 Total respondents= 500 • Category 1-Inner city area • Category 2-Residential and Commercial area with different route/mode choice • Category 3-Mostly suburban area with least mode of transport Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

15. People walk more for subway/suburban train than tram/bus - Conviction or prediction?? Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

16. Findings: People walk more for subway/suburban train than tram/bus ( actual time) Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

17. Findings: People walk more for subway/suburban train than tram/bus ( preferred time) Total respondents: Bus= 485, Tram= 459, U bahn= 487, S bahn= 465 • Respondents would accept to walk considerably longer for Ubahn/Sbahn than bus/tram Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

18. Findings: People walk more for subway/suburban train than tram/bus (Statistical test) T-Test for actual walking time(ex: Bus and U bahn) T-Test for preferred walking time(ex: Bus and S bahn) Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

19. How accurately people assume their walking time? Do they over-estimate or under-estimate? • From the difference between the ArcGIS calculated time and self estimated time, it is observed that around 45.4%respondents assumed their walking time nearly accurate, when there is no time difference or only difference of ±1 minute. Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

20. How to reach the station? Which route and Why? Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

21. What are the Influential factors for route choice? Any Other Factors?- Example: High heels Is there any relation between factors influencing the route choice and the maximum accepted walking time for different mode? How to test?? Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker

22. How these assessments can be incorporated to improve the situation? How these trends of travel behaviour can be utilize for the betterment of PuT? Conclusion and recommendation • wider approach ( ex: household travel survey ) • Some dedicated analysis only for public transport modes can (similar to this study) also be included into future MiD (Mobilität in Deutschland) for Munich city Walk 21, Vienna 22.10.2015 Rumana Islam Sarker