APPENDIX D: USER SURVEYS

APPENDIX D: USER SURVEYS

APPENDIX D: USER SURVEYS

EXAMPLE 1: PASSENGER USER SURVEY QUESTIONS Sample characterization Female, male Age What is your principal activity? (Independent, construction worker, seller, executive director, technical professional, and so on) What is your educational level (basic incomplete, basic complete, average incomplete, average complete, technical or university incomplete, technical or university complete) Characterization of trips What transport mode do you use with more frequency for your typical trips? (Only bus, only metro, bus and metro, transfer between buses, ferry, bicycle, car, taxi, other) How many times in a week do you make the typical trips? What is the main purpose of your typical trips? (study, work, and so on) Average trip time (walk, waiting, trip) What alternative transport mode do you have available? (car, carpooling, bus, metro, walk, taxi, walk, bicycle, and so on) How much to do you spend daily in transport? Opinion about the service Please classify the following aspects of your transportation (from 1-Appaling to 7 - Excellent) Time waiting for transport at station Quality of access to stations (distance from where you live, how easy it is to reach the station, distance from station to your destination, safety of access) Driving safety Comfort level of trip

Number of transfers Quality of buses Personal security in bus stops and inside mode of transport Price of transport Payment system Which of these aspects have improved since the implementation of BRT system (Improved, maintained, got worse)? Time waiting for transport at station Quality of access to stations (distance from where you live, how easy it is to reach the station, distance from station to your destination, safety of access) Driving safety Comfort level of trip Number of transfers Quality of buses Personal security in bus stops and inside mode of transport Price of transport Payment system EXAMPLE 2: TRANSANTIAGO USER PERCEPTION SURVEY (SANTIAGO, CHILE) ABSTRACT A user opinion survey on the Transantiago system was conducted on the 26th of March 2008 to measure and understand the change in perception of the passengers. The results were compared to two similar surveys conducted before the launch of the new system in October 2006 and shortly after the launch in March 2007. The sample users were asked to rate the system on the basis of their travel experience by rating various aspects of the system by allocating a number value between 1 and 7, with 1 being the worst and 7 the best. The ratings were compared between the three separate time intervals - 2006, 2007 and 2008. Overall it was noted that there has been a positive change in perception of bus users, with the system as a whole receiving a rating over 4 (out of 7) on all aspects. There is a similar positive change in perception and ratings of the new system by Metro users. It is noted that there is still room for improvement, as travel times and overall ratings have not

reached the user perception levels of 2006 (preTransantiago). INTRODUCTION Transantiago is a citywide public transportation plan which includes the optimization of the bus routes and services, fare integration using advanced technologies, continuous bus fleet renovation, strong requirements for the companies delivering transit services, support infrastructure for buses (priority and exclusive lanes, bus stops, integration terminals, ands user information and control systems) and expansion of the Metro network. System commissioning happened on a single day for the whole Metropolitan Area on February 10, 2007, after 6 years of planning and implementation process. Bus service improvements include the reorganization of routes into five trunk corridors using the main thoroughfares of the road network and ten local service areas that feed the trunk and metro services and provide transport services within the areas. Each trunk corridor and service area is privately provided under concession contracts awarded through an open and competitive bidding process. Administration of system funds is also a concession to a pool of banks, which are in charge of providing the integration technology (contactless smart cards, points of sale and re-charge, validation on board buses, and transaction management). Control and user information systems are privately provided, as well as selected infrastructures of the system (integration terminals.) The Metro network is developed and operated by an autonomous public agency. USER OPINION SURVEY A user opinion survey was conducted on the 26th of March 2008, similar to the surveys undertaken in October 2006 and March 2007. The results of the survey were compared to the user ratings of the public transportation system at two other time periods, October 2006 prior to the launch of the Transantiago system and March 2007 shortly after the launch of the Transantiago system. The comparisons were made to track any change in perception of users regarding the quality of Transantiago. The 2008 sample size was a random selection of 45 households in the urban area of Santiago that used mass transit. They were interviewed via the telephone on the 26th of March 2008. The level of reliability of the survey is 95%.

TRAVELER FEATURES By gender and age: The sample is not representative of the population as there is a bias towards women. The samples are, however, comparable across time periods. By educational level and occupation: Nearly a third of the sample of households surveyed is at least high school educated. Further, the second and third highest proportions of users were employees and professionals or technicians. Majority of the users indicated other as their main activity. By most frequently used mode of transport: It was found that the percentage of users that used transfers to switch modes of transport increased from 47% to 69% between March 2007 and 2008. Further, the percentage of users that combined travel on Transantiago with the Metro or only used the Metro increased from 59% to 65%. The average number of trips undertaken per week per user decreased from an average of 4.5 in October 2006 to 4.4 in March 2007 to 4.2 in March 2008. The majority of the users travelled for work. TRAVEL EXPERIENCE Travel Time by Bus: The journey time by bus without any transfers decreased by an average of 16 minutes between 2007 and 2008. Further, the journey time with transfers between buses also fell by an average of 3 minutes between 2007 and 2008. Travel time by Metro: Travel time by the Metro fell by an average of 8 minutes. Total travel time also decreased on average by 8 minutes even when combining commute by Metro with a bus transfer. Cost of Travel: The amount spent by users on transportation each day decreased by 17 cents between March 2007 and 2008.

202

EMBARQ: Bus Karo: A Guidebook on Bus Planning & Operations

EMBARQ: Bus Karo: A Guidebook on Bus Planning & Operations 203

APPENDIX D: USER SURVEYS

APPENDIX D: USER SURVEYS

60 % 51 % 41% 40 %

54 %

Change in User Perception - Transantiago

Cost of Travel

100%

75%

20 % 9% 12% 11 %

19 %

21 % 20 % 12 % 9% 9% 9% 17 % 6%

50%

25%

0% 0-500 501 -1000 Oct -06 Mar-07 1001 -1500 Mar-08 US Cents 1501 -2000 > 2000

0% closer to origin or destination price system quality of bus waiting time at stops safety level in commute travel time number of transfers system of payment comfort personel safety

QUALITY OF SERVICE The sample users were asked to rate ten aspects of the transportation system from 1 to 7 with 1 being the worst and 7 the best. The following ten aspects were rated: system of payment; price system; safety level in the commute; travel time; distance from origin or destination; personal safety ; quality of the buses; number of transfers; convenience of travel; and waiting time at stops.
Rating of various aspects of the Transantiago System
Payment system Price Safety level in commute Travel time in vehicle Distance from orgin or destination Personal safety Quality of Buses Number of Transfers Oct -06 Mar -07 Mar -08 Convenience of Travel Waiting Time at Stops 0 2
3.1 3 .4 3.7 3 .7 4.0 4.2 4 .2 4.3 4.8 5 .3

Got worse

Stayed the same

Improved

CONCLUSIONS 1. The percentage of users that use transfers in their commute increased by 22% between March 2007 and 2008. 2. The percentage of users who use only the Metro fell from 18% to 9% between March 2007 and 2008. 3. The percentage of users who only use the Metro in combination increased by 6% between March 2007 and 2008. 4. The average number of trips undertaken by the sample users each week fell from an average of 4.4 to 4.2 between March 2007 and 2008 respectively. 5. Between March 2007 and 2008, the total time taken to travel a stipulated distance decreased from 75 minutes to 72 minutes. 6. Due to better coverage of the Transantiago service, the total walking time between the origin station or stop and the final destination has decreased. 7. Despite a poor rating for the use of transfers in commute, there has been a consistent increase in the number of travellers using transfers across the time intervals. 8. The overall quality of service on the Transantiago system has shown an improvement in almost all aspects as rated by the sample users in the survey. 9. Ratings for the Transantiago system have been consistently improving over the three time periods March 2007, October 2007 and March 2008. Better overall travel or commute time and overall ratings are yet to reach the levels obtained in October 2006, before the launch of the system.

5 .6

5 .1 4.9 4.6 4 .7 4 .9 4 .6 5 .3 4 .6 4 .7 4 .9

4 .7

4 .4 4 .3 4 .7 4 .1 4 .7

3.9 4 .4 3.9

Summary Table from User Survey The overall rating of the new Transantiago system increased from 4.1 in March 2007 to 4.3 in 2008; however it is still lower than the ranking given to the older system. There is a significant increase in user satisfaction on all aspects of the new system except the quality of the buses and the feeling of safety during the commute by the users of the system. There is a positive change in the perception of bus users who have rated the new system over a 4 (out of 7) on all aspects. There is a similar positive change in perception and subsequent rating of the new system by Metro users. In addition, the sample users were asked to determine if the following aspects had either, Improved, Stayed the same or Worsened since the unveiling of the Transantiago system. The results are shown below.
% Users that transfers Proportion of users- Metro (full journey or one leg) Average weekly trips per user Average travel time Average spending per day (round trip) Average rating system Micros Amarillas 2006 29% 40% 4.5 62 mins $1.06 4.6 Transantiago March 2007 47% 59% 4.4 75 mins $1.14 4 Transantiago October 2007 58% 68% 4.1 73 mins $0.98 4.1 Transantiago March 2008 69% 65% 4.2 72 mins $0.97 4.3

Source: [116]

204

EMBARQ: Bus Karo: A Guidebook on Bus Planning & Operations

EMBARQ: Bus Karo: A Guidebook on Bus Planning & Operations 205