Comprehensive Mobility Plan of Guntur - MTIP Sem III Studio by Guru Raja T.S.

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education Gov. of India TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO III SEMESTER - MTIP

INTRODUCTION

•

environmentally

• To

and

for Guntur. OBJECTIVES TO

• To

OBJECTIVES TO ACHIEVE THE VISION: • CMP

AND

transport

THE VISION: • To

SCOPE LIMITATION: Focuses on passenger travel demand modelling (not goods) TVC Data, Pedestrian & Parking Data from CTS 2006 (Secondary source) cordon OD survey has not been conducted. is needed as a prerequisite before any huge investment in the transport sector. prepare a desirable urban transport development plan based on long-term vision goals develop a list of urban transport measures for implementation in a span of 20 years achieve cost-effective, sustainable and implementable programme in the urban transport sector is needed to address the mobility needs of the people focusing on non-motorized and public transport, rather than catering to the needs of private automobiles. optimizes the “mobility pattern of people and goods” and act as an effective platform for integrating land use and transport planning

• To

• It

•

• It

transport.

• To

• Outer

• To

year • To

VISION: achieve an integrated and accessible system ensure an sustainable and economically This study aims to develop a Comprehensive Mobility Plan ACHIEVE appreciate existing transport network in the city in order to assess growth of transport sector develop a base year travel demand model and validate with the existing conditions develop and evaluate alternate development strategies forecast travel demand for horizon formulate strategies for long term sustainable

prosperous Guntur. AIM:

Toolkit

•

DARSAN-2200600039 ANIMESH-2200600037

. • To

A comprehensive mobility plan (CMP) of any city presents a technical document containing short, medium and long term schemes and action programs for the mobility of people and goods with emphasis on mass transport system in an urban area.

The CMP will be a key document to justify and support transport proposals of the city, to the Central Government and multilateral funding agencies provide safe, secure, efficient, reliable, & seamless connectivity & enhances economic social & environmental

Review of CMP

•

CMP is needed as a prerequisite for availing financial grant for major schemes from Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India (CMPs prepared for AMRUT cities before transport infrastructure investments) To prepare a desirable urban transport development plan based on long-term vision and goals To develop a list of urban transport measures for implementation in a span of 20 years To achieve cost-effective, sustainable and implementable programme in the urban transport sector It is needed to address the mobility needs of the people focusing on non-motorized and public transport, rather than catering to the needs of private automobiles. It optimizes the “mobility pattern of people and goods” and act as an effective platform for integrating land use and transport planning.

Comprehensive Mobility Plan (CMP):

•

Needsustainability.forCMPpreparation: •

•

Role of CMP:

•

DARSAN-2200600039

Task-1: Defining the Scope of CMP

benchmarks • Integral

Task 4.1 Public Transport Task 4.2: Road Network Task 4.3: NMT Facilities Task 4.4: Mobility Management Task 4.5: Regulatory & Institutional Measures Task 4.6: Fiscal Measures Task 4.7: CMP Measures and NUTP Objectives Task 5: Preparation of Implementation Program

Task 3: Development of Integrated Urban Land use and Transport Strategy Task 3.1: Preparation of Vision & Goals Task 3.2: Future UrbanScenariosGrowth Task 3.3: Evaluation of Urban Land-use & Transport Strategy Task 3.4: NetworkTransportFutureScenarios

•

• The Alternative Analysis may be included as part of the CMP or DPR for projects less than 5 billion rupees.

Tasks Towards CMP Preparation

•

• Achievement

Task 5.1: Preparation of ImplementationProgram Task 5.2: Social and ConsiderationsEnvironmental Task 5.3: Preparation of Project Profile Sheets

Key Outcomes of CMP: The CMP should lead to the following outcomes in the long term: Improvement in mobility for all socio economic groups and genders Improvement in air quality of Sustainable Urban Transport Scenario with reference to the BAU scenario Improvement in safety and security for pedestrians, NMT and livability in the city Increase in sustainable transport mode share and a decrease in private motor vehicle use of desirable indicators and part of Master Plan ANIMESH-2200600037

• It is not mandatory, all cities considering a funding application to central government are recommended to submit the CMP and to obtain approval from MoUD.

• Key document to provide the rationale for transport proposals.

Task 2: Data Collection and Analysis of Existing Urban Transport Environment Task 2.1: Review of City Profile Task 2.2: Review of Land-use Patterns Task 2.3: Review of Existing Transport Systems Task 2.4: DemandTransportSurveys Task 2.5: Analysis of Existing Traffic/Transport Conditions

Task 4: Development of Urban Mobility Plan

• A separate study for Alternative Analysis is required for major projects with the cost greater than or equal to 5 billion rupees (Rs 500 Crore) in 2008 prices.

• In the overall planning hierarchy, the CMP can be considered as a prerequisite for the submission of DPR (Level 1) for JNNURM funding.

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 04N Comparison of CMP with other plans: Comparison of CMP Perspective Plan (Kerala, NITI Report)Aayog Regional Plan Board)Planning(NCR Guidelines)planDevelopment(URDPFI Local Area Plan DDA)Bhubaneswar,(CDP PurposeSpecial Plan)e(BhubaneswarPlan-Mobility Annual guidelines)(URDPFIPlan CDP (Ref: Chandigarh)CDP CTTS (Ref: Chennai)Bangalore,CTTS CMP (Ref: 2017)VijayawadaCMP Time frame 15 yrs 15 20 20 30 yrs 15 20 15 20 yrs yearFinancial (5) 20 30 20 30 20 30 Area Jurisdictionof National/ State / Inter State InterState/ ‐AreaSpecialRegionInvestmentInterDistrict/state/district,or Urban Centre Area Specific SectorsDevelopmentSpecific Urban Level City City City ResponsibleEntity NITI CommitteeStateAayog/Planning AuthorityPlanningRegional ULBsAuthorities/DevelopmentUrban District Planning CommitteePlanningMetropolitanCommittee/ Central And GovernmentsState AuthorityLocal ULB StudyPerformingAgency State Govt., Govt. Appointed SPVs, AppointedAgency StudyConductingfor How it Approvedis departmentRespective of ministries. RPA Boards AuthoritiesDevelopmentUrban AuthorityDevelopment AuthorityDevelopment AuthorityLocal State Govt. tDevelopmenAuthority Mohua How Financing is Done State/ Grants/CenralPPP State/ Grants/PPPCenral State CommissionsFinance Levy Of Appropriate User Charges Central And GrantsGovernmentState State And FundsCentral GOI, JNNURM PPPCorporation,MetroTrafficDept.,HighwaysULBs,Police,Rail HighwaysMohua, Dept., ULBs, Traffic Police, Metro PPPCorporation,Rail HAYCELIN-2200600040

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 05NComparison of Various Plans with CMP Comparison of Various Plans: report)NITIplanPerspective(Kerala,Aayog board)planningplanRegional(NCR guidelines)planDevelopment(URDPFI Local area plan DDA)Bhubaneswar,(CDP purposeSpecial plan)e(Bhubaneswarplan-mobility guidelines)(URDPFIplanAnnual forBangalorePlanMasterPlanMaster(Ref:2031) CDP (Ref: Chandigarh)CDP CTTS (Ref: Chennai)Bangalore,CTTS CMP (Ref: 2017)VijayawadaCMP Review of existing transport system X X X X X X X X X Transport Demand Survey X X X X X X Review of land use plan X X X X Analysis of urban transport situations X X X X X X X Preparation of future land use scenario X X X X X X Future transport network scenario X X X X X Future technological scenario X X X X Transport demand forecast model X X X Model impacts on all sections of society and modes X X X Network evaluations X X X Model CO2 emissions and air pollutants X X X Impact analysis of scenarios on measurable indicators X X X Preparation of mobility framework X X X X X Preparation of urban transport measures X X X X X X X Social and environmental impact assessment X X X Institutional scheme for project implementation X X X X X X Preparation of implementation programs X X X X X X X X X Stakeholder consultation X X X X X X X Periodical update and maintenance X X X X DARSAN-2200600039 ANIMESH-2200600037

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 06N TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT PEDESTRIAN IMPLEMENTATIONFACILITIESOFITSMOBILITYMODALMULTI LOCATION BANGALORE UJJAIN RAJKOT YEAR 2019 2019 2014 POPULATION 85.20 LAKHS (AS PER CENSUS 2011) 5.15 LAKHS (AS PER CENSUS 2011) 12.86 LAKHS ( AS PER CENSUS 2011) AREA 1600.99 SQ.KM 151.8 SQ.KM 104.9 SQ.KM VISION Efficient and Sustainable Transportation for All Integrate city structure and transportation towards sustainable economical safe accessible system to achieve low carbon mobility Provide technological as well as planning strategies to meet the mobility and accessibility demands of all people irrespective of their socio economic profile and gender by the least carbon emitting modes of transport PROPOSAL → The Transit Oriented Development (ToD) has been proposed, which envisages Bengaluru becoming a public transport oriented city → Specific focus on improving facilities for bus services and pedestrians → The CMP targets to move 70% of people on mass transit rather than privately owned vehicles → CMP also proposes technical measures including ITS → Improving publiclastinfrastructureNMTsupportingmileconnectivitywithbicyclesharing → Integration of Transit system public Hybrid/Electrictransport,buses → Safe and accessible infrastructure Transport infrastructure → Development of SEZ (Special Economic Zone) for engineering sector, IT connectivitytownshipsparks,andtheir → Densification along transit corridors through Transit Oriented Zone → Economic corridor along the Surendra Nagar Rajkot Morbi Kandla link on NH 27 → Demand for BRT irrespective of city size and population REASONCONSULTANTTOOPT Infrastructure Development Corporation (Karnataka) Limited Bangalore(iDeCK) CMP emphasizes on Public Transportation School of Planning and Architecture, Vijayawada, UjjainUMTChas area which is nearly equal to Guntur, and also population is comparable CEPT RajkotAhmedabadUniversity,CMPemphasizes on Transit DevelopmentOriented CASE STUDY OF CMPs PRUDHVI-2200600048

INTRODUCTION TO GUNTUR

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 08N ANDHRA PRADESHGUNTURDISTRICT MUNICIPALITYGUNTUR INTRODUCTION TO GUNTUR Guntur is located at16.29°N 80.43°E. It has an average elevation of 33 m (108 ft) and is situated on the plains. There are few hills in the surrounding suburban areas and Perecherla Reserve Forest on the north west. The city is around 64 km (40 mi) to the west of the Bay of Bengal on the east coast of India. GEOGRAPHY : GUNTUR Amarawati Nandivelu Narsaraopet GENERAL PROFILE OF MUNICIPALITY Population : 7,82,354(GMC area 2011 Census) Town Classification: As per Census Class I (> 1 lakh) As per URDPFI Large City (5 10 Lakh) Population density : 5623 persons/sq.kms Pop. growth rate: 31.63 % Decadal (1911 2011) Sex ratio: 1019 females per 1000 males Child Sex ratio : 951 females per 1000 males No. of households : 2,02,512 (2011 Census) Avg Household size 3.8 Avg Literacy rate : 80.40 % Male literacy rate : 85.74 % Female literacy rate: 75.21 % % of slum dweller : 37% • Guntur is a city and the headquartersadministrative of Guntur district in the Indian state of Andhra Pradesh. • The city has a total road length (Arterial, Sub arterial, Collector) of 2238.23.00 km LOCATION DIST TO NEARBY ULB’S DISTANCES TO NEARBY ULBS VIJAYAWADA 35 KM ONGOLE 110 KM RAJAHMUNDRY 190 KM NELLORE 245 KM PRANJAL-2200600047

1. Guntur Tenali section, 2. Guntur section,Vijayawada 3. Guntur GuntakalNallapadu-section, 4. Guntur PagidipalliNallapadusection.

Vijayawada (VGA) is the nearest airport to Guntur Junction, which is 54.4 Km away.

VijayawadaTowardsTowardsTenali

• The other arterial city roads include, the Grand Trunk Road, JKC College Road, Lakshmipuram Road, RoadPattabhipuramandPalakaluru Road etc.

Via

• National Highway 16 passes on the eastern side of the city, which is also a part of Asian Highway 45 and Golden Quadrilateral. Air

Guntur had 4 different railway lines passing through its junction.

Spatial Growth Pattern of Guntur Population 7.82 lakh I Developed Area 47.66 sqkm Population – 10.3 lakhs I Developed Area –70.76 sqkm INTRODUCTION TO GUNTUR DISTANCE BETWEEN P.T. GUNTUR JN.NTR BUS STAND 1.5KM GUNTUR JN. VGA AIRPORT 54.4KM 09 PRANJAL-2200600047

• The Mahatma Gandhi Inner Ring Road is an arterial road with a stretch of 6.34 km (3.94 mi), that encircles the city with its start and end points on NH16.

Guntur JN. Regional Connectivity

RoadViaViaRailway 20112021

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 10NBASE MAP BASE MAP OF GUNTUR Amaravati WARDWISE GROSS POPULATION DENSITY - 2021 ERSTWHILE MASTER PLAN - 2006 • Guntur municipality was constituted in the year 1866 and the first elected body was formed in 1881. The municipality was upgraded to II Grade in 1891, I Grade in 1917, Special Grade in 1952 and then to Selection Grade in 1960. In 1994, the Municipal Corporation was formed. • In 2006 first Master Plan was prepared for 54 sq.kms, Further as per Extension of municipal limits (G.O. no 279, dated 12 01 2012), 12 peripheral villages , an area of 85 sq.kms was merged into GMC. • Currently , GMC is spread over an area of 139 Sq.Km across 62 wards. • On an average , Guntur has 74 persons per hectare gross population density , in that 17 wards have density higher than 400 persons per hectare and 10 wards have density less than 50 persons per hectare. • Gorantla MASTER PLAN BOUNDRY Wards = 38 Area = 54 sq.kms Wards = 62 Area = 139 sq.kms Reference: https://guntur.ap.gov.in/ GURURAJA-2200600053

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 11NLANDUSE MAP Amaravati LANDUSE MAP OF GUNTUR : RESIDENTIAL30%AGRICULTURAL42%VACANT13%PLOTS TRANSPORT - 9% Public/semi pub.- 1% Recreational 0.7 % Mixed 0.4 % Water bodies 0.3% COMMERCIAL 2% INDUSTRIAL 1.06% LANDUSE DISTRIBUTION - 2021 LANDUSE AREA (HA) % RESIDENTIAL 4238.13 30.46 COMMERCIAL 264.86 1.90 INDUSTRIAL 147.29 1.06 PUBLIC SEMI PUBLIC 148.56 1.07 TRANSPORT 1220.58 8.77 RECREATIONAL 79.94 0.57 MIXED USE 52.03 0.37 DEVELOPED LAND 6151.38 44.21 VACANT PLOTS 1861.92 13.38 AGRICULTURAL 5861.75 42.13 WATER 38.84 0.28 NON DEVELOPED LAND 7762.51 55.79 TOTAL 13913.89 100.00 COMPARISION OF DEVELOPED LAND WITH URDPFI Urban Landuse EXISTING % URDPFI % Remarks % RESIDENTIAL 68.90 38 Excess +30.8 COMMERCIAL 4.31 6 Deficit 1.6 INDUSTRIAL 2.39 8 Deficit 5.6 PUBLICPUBLICSEMI 2.42 12 Deficit 9.5 TRANSPORT 19.84 14 Excess +5.8 RECREATIONAL 1.30 16 Deficit 14.7 MIXED USE 0.85 6 Deficit 5.1 Total 100 GURURAJA-2200600053

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 12NBUILT UP AREA MAP AmaravatiCategory PlinthArea % Builtareaup % FSI RESIDENTIAL 1064.0 44.3 1724.9 53.1 1.62 COMMERCIAL 117.9 4.9 225.4 6.9 1.91 PUBLIC SEMI PUBLIC 38.5 1.6 110.1 3.4 2.86 TRANSPORTFACILITIES 1.3 0.1 1.3 0.0 1.00 INDUSTRIAL 21.4 0.9 23.6 0.7 1.10 MIXED USE R&C 3.3 0.1 8.4 0.3 2.51 Roads 1155.7 48.1 1155.7 35.6 1.00 Total 2402.2 100.0 3249.3 100.0 1.35 BUILTUP AREA STATISTICS Overall Built up Area = 32.5 sq.kms (23%) Total Ground Coverage = 24 sq.kms i.e. 17.2 % Area of Guntur Municipal Corporation Limits Existing Per Capita Land utilisation (2021 population of 10.2 Lakhs) LANDUSE SQ. METRES Commercial 1.28 Industrial 0.33 Public - Semi Public 0.39 Transport Facilities 0.02 BUILT UP AREA MAP OF GURURAJAGUNTUR-2200600053

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N DETOUR INDEX DETOUR VALUE CALCULATION ORIGIN DESTINATION DISTANCEACTUALINK.M STRAIGHT LINE DISTANCE IN K.M VALUEDETOURIN% 100 110 120 130 GUNTUR VIJAYAWADA 36.1 31.3 115.3355 27.13823 29.85205 GUNTUR AMARAVATI 33.2 24.6 134.9593 18.22771 20.05048 21.87325 23.69602 GUNTUR TENALI 28.2 23.5 120 19.58333 21.54167 23.5 GUNTUR NARASARAOPETA 47.5 42 113.0952 37.13684 40.85053 GUNTUR VINUKONDA 89.5 79.5 112.5786 70.61732 77.67905 GUNTUR BAPATLA 53.9 45.2 119.2478 37.90427 41.69469 GUNTUR MACHILIPATNAM 102.1 75.1 135.9521 55.24006 60.76406 66.28807 71.81208 GUNTUR ELURU 93.8 83.1 112.8761 73.62058 80.98263 GUNTUR CHIRALA 66.1 55.3 119.5298 46.2646 50.89106 GUNTUR SATTENAPALLI 36.3 32.2 112.7329 28.56309 31.41939 DETOUR ACCESSIBILITY VALUES • A measure of the efficiency of a transport network in terms of how well it overcomes distance or the friction of distance. • The closer the detour index gets to 1, the more the network is spatially efficient (ACTUAL ROAD DISTANCE IN K.M) DETOUR VALUE = * 100 (STRAIGHT LINE DISTANCE IN K.M) (STRAIGHT LINE DISTANCE IN K.M) DETOUR ACCESSIBILITY VALUE = * RANGE OF DETOUR ACCESSIBILITY VALUE (CALC DETOUR VALUE IN %) →The map here shows the detour accessibility values, and most of the places fall under less accessible category →The major towns and cities that are nearby Guntur are least accessible except Vijayawada, Amaravati and Tenali LEGEND INTRODUCTION TO GUNTUR PRUDHVI-2200600047 13

STEP 03: Defining the objective weight based on the entropy concept.

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 14NSPATIAL GROWTH CHARACTERISTICS SHANNON ENTROPY INDEX SHANNON ENTROPY STEP 01 STEP 02 CONCENTRICZONENUMBER AREA IN SQ.KM Proportions (P ij) Calculation of E ij 2011 2021 Pi 2011 Pi 2021 (Pij ) X Log ( Pij) 2011 (Pij ) X Log ( Pij) 2021 2 9.06 10.62 0.19 0.15 -0.137 -0.124 4 17.81 20.19 0.37 0.29 0.160 0.155 6 11.38 19.88 0.24 0.28 0.149 0.155 8 5.70 14.31 0.12 0.20 0.110 0.140 10 1.17 2.68 0.02 0.04 0.039 0.054 12 2.53 3.07 0.05 0.04 0.068 0.059 Σ 47.66 70.76 -0.663 -0.687 No. of Variable (m) = 6 Value of K = 1/log(m) = 1.2851 Eij= - ( k ) X ((Pij ) X Log ( Pij)) 0.8519 0.8832 STEP Calculation03of W ij 1- Eij 0.1481 0.1168 Σ = 0.1481+0.1168 = 0.2649 W ij = 0.559 0.441 Shannon index is used to find out the type of growth and direction of the city. To find the area in which city growth happen in past decades. In this index built up area is taken from last two decades and compared to find out the entropy index

GURURAJA-2200600053

•

PROCEDURE FOR OBJECTIVE WEIGHT THROUGH SHANNON ENTROPY

•

STEP 01: Normalization of the arrays of decision matrix (performance indices) to obtain the project outcomes Pij.

STEP 02: Computation of the entropy measure of project outcomes using the following equation. in which K = 1 / ln (m), here M is the no. of elements i.e. 6

INFERENCES: The value of entropy varies between 0 to (Log 6 = 0.778). Values closer to zero represents compact distribution or homogeneity of urban growth and values closer to log m represents dispersed distribution of sprawl. The change of entropy identifies whether land development is toward a more dispersal (sprawl) or compact pattern. Index 0.441 indicates the occurrence of heterogenous & dispersed Settlement growth in 2021. It is also observed that 2021 settlement growth is more compact compared to that of 2011

•

log m

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 15N TAZ No ADMINISTRATIVE WARDS POOLED CAUSE 6 56+54 Homogeneity of landuse Agriculture 10 55+27 Population size 13 2+5 Population size 16 22+23 Homogeneity of landuse Residential 18 18+19 Homogeneity of landuse Residential 37 3+9 Homogeneity of landuse Residential 51 34+41 Regular geometric form & size 52 33+35 Regular geometric form & size **Remaining all TAZs are delineated based on Administrative conveniences and easy availability of planning information Type of TAZ Criteria followed to Study Area Internal TAZs (1-54) • Inline with existing administrative boundaries • Population size & Homogeneity of landuse • Regular geometric form & Small size to obtain accuracy of traffic movement and reliable trip generation rate. External TAZs (55-61) • Each TAZ is competent with all roads leading out from the city in that direction. NEED FOR THE ZONING SYSTEM: ZONING ANALYSIS Praltipadu CHILAKALURIPETCHENNAINarsaraopet Tenali Amaravati MangalagiriNandivelu TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONES DELINEATION MAP SHOWING THE DELINEATED TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONES OF GUNTUR : ❑ TAZs serve as the primary unit of analysis in a travel demand forecasting model. They contain socioeconomic data related to land use. TAZs are where trips begin and end. ❑ Spatial units of study area ; One can define a TAZ, also referred to as a zone, as the following: “Geographic areas dividing the planning region into relatively similar areas of land use and land activity. Zones represent the origins and destinations of travel activity within the region… every household, place of employment, shopping center, and other activity… are first aggregated into zones and then further simplified into a single node called a centroid”. ❑ Main objective is facilitating the spatial quantification of landuse and economic factors which influence the travel pattern EXTERNAL TAZ ROAD NAME SETTLEMENTS COVERED 55 Mangalagiri Mangalagiri, Vijayawada 56 Nandivelu Nandivelu,Duggirala,Kolakaluru 57 Tenali Narakoduru, Tenali 58 Praltipadu Road Etukuru, Praltipadu 59 GntChennaiChilakaluripetRoad Chowdavaram,ChennaiChilakaluripeta, 60 Narsaraopet Narsaraopet,HyderabadSattenapalli, 61 Amravati Road Amaravati, AZs 1 54 : INTERNAL ZONES TAZs 55 61: EXTERNAL ZONES GURURAJA-2200600053

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 16NLANDUSE ENTROPY CALCULATION TAZ WISE LANDUSE TAZ WISE BUILT USE Amaravati Where:N=the number of different land uses within the station buffer area Pn = the proportion of acres of the nth land use within station buffer area INFERENCE : The values of land uses mix range from 0 to 1, with lower land use mix buffers (i.e., buffers with more homogeneity in land uses) having values closer to 0 and buffers with greater land use mix having values closer to 1 (Ryan and Frank, 2009) • City core is heterogeneous, just outside these zones are more homogenous. • Areas near to southern end are homogenous and other border TAZs are heterogeneous. LANDUSE ENTROPY INDEX LANDUSE ENTROPY INDEX : GURURAJA-2200600053

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 17N PREDOMINANT LANDUSE LANDUSE PROPORTIONS %Amaravati COMMERCIALINDUSTRIALLANDUSELANDUSE PUBLIC SEMI-PUBLIC LANDUSE Inference: • It is observed that Agriculture is predominant land use in Taz 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7 . • Vacant / open land is predominant in Taz 5 and 15. • Residential Landuse is predominant in remaining all Tazs. COMMERCIAL 30, 40, 42, 43, 45 INDUSTRIAL 2, 10, 21 PUBLIC SEMI PUBLIC 14, 21, 45, 50 MAJOR EMPLOYMENT GENERATING LANDUSE ZONES RESIDENTIAL LANDUSE ACTIVITY DISTRIBUTION PREDOMINANT LANDUSE GURURAJA-2200600053

NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 18N ROAD NETWORK CHARACTERITICS ROAD HEIRARCHY CLASSIFICATION MAP Total road length 1956 kms 117Arterialkms6% Sub80arterialkms4% Collector195kms10% Local street 156380%kms • Total No.of Links = 30580 • Arterial = 494 • Sub arterial= 306 • Collector = 518 • Local= 29262 • No.of Nodes = 23027 Network Density = 14.5 km/sq.km ROAD DENSITY OF ARTERIAL, SUB-ARTERIAL, COLLECTOR STREETS ROAD DENSITY MAP INCLUDING LOCAL ROADS 11 TAZS i.e. 1,2,4, 5, 6, 24,29,38,407have9,15,13,7,8,lessDensityTAZsi.e.,41,44,49havehigherdensitythantheaverage Inference: Inference: 5 TAZS i.e. 1, 2, 3, 4 ,7 have 4DensitylessTAZsi.e.38,39,40,42havehigherdensitythantheaverage NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS GURURAJA-2200600053

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N SectionROWNo. Road name Heirarchy 1 Pattabhipuram road Arterial 2 Shaik Galeb Shaheb Rd Arterial 3 Guntur Byepass Arterial 4 Chilakaluripet Rd Arterial 5 Mahatma Gandhi Inner Ring Road Sub Arterial 6 1st Lane Extension ArterialSub 7 DRM road Collector 8 Ananthavarappadu Rd Collector ROAD INVENTORY ROAD INVENTORY 7 8 2 3 6 5 1TOWARDSSATTENAPALLITOWARDS CHILAKALOORIPETA TOWARDSONGOLE AMARAVATHITOWARDS TOWARDSBAPATLATOWARDSSATTENAPALLI VIJAYAWADATOWARDS 4 PRUDHVI-2200600048 19

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 20N SectionROWNo. Road name Heirarchy Length no lanesof divided undivide/d Carriageway (kerb to kerb) surfaceRoad laneServicewidth(m) Shoulder Footpath Street lightin (y/n)g Right of widthway km widthLHS Medianwidth widthRHS LHS RHS WidthLHS WidthRHS EncroachmentLHS EncroachmentRHS Surface WidthLHS WidthRHS EncroachmentLHS EncroachmentRHSSurface 1 Pattabhipuram road Arterial 1.7 6 divided 10.2 3 10.2 Asphalt 10 11 medium medium soil medium medium Slab y 44.4 2 Shaik Galeb Shaheb Rd Arterial 3.2 4 divided 7.5 1 7.5 constructioAsphaltundern 7.2 7.3 low low soil y 30.5 3 Guntur Byepass Arterial 6.1 6 divided 10.8 4.5 10.8 Asphalt 7.2 7.2 2.4 2.8 none none Asphalt y 64 4 Chilakaluripet Rd Arterial 2.7 4 divided 7.2 1.5 7.2 Asphalt 9.5 8.8 low low soil y 33 Section 3 Section 1 Section 2 ROADROADINVENTORYINVENTORY ARTERIAL ROADARTERIAL ROAD ARTERIAL ROAD PRUDHVI-2200600048

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ARTERIAL ROADSection 4 SUB-ARTERIAL ROAD SectionROWNo. Road name Heirarchy 1 Mahatma Gandhi Inner Ring Road ArterialSub 2 1st Lane Extension Sub Arterial 3 DRM road Collector 4 Ananthavarappadu Rd Collector divided undivided/ UNdividedUndividedUndividedUndivided surfaceRoad constructioAsphaltAsphaltundernAsphaltAsphaltSectionSection1 2 SUB-ARTERIAL ROAD Section 3 COLLECTOR STREET ROAD Section 4 COLLECTOR STREET ROAD ROAD INVENTORY PRUDHVI-2200600048 21

• 5 Tazs – 1,2,3,4,7 have less alpha index whereas

Inference: This is measure of connectivity which evaluates the number of cycles in a graph in comparison with the maximum number of cycles. The higher the alpha index, the more a network is connected. Trees and simple networks will have a value of 0. A value of 1 indicates a completely connected network. Measures the level of connectivity independently of the number of nodes.

• 8 Tazs – 27, 29,30,36,43,45,50,54 have higher Beta index

GURURAJA-2200600053

Inference: Beta Index measures the level of connectivity in a graph and is expressed by the relationship between the number of links (e) over the number of nodes (v). Trees and simple networks have Beta value of less than one. A connected network with one cycle has a value of 1. More complex networks have a value greater than 1. In a network with a fixed number of nodes, the higher the number of links, the higher the number of paths possible in the network. Complex networks have a high Beta value.

SPATIAL ASSESSMENT OF TOPOLOGICAL PATTERN/ ROAD NETWORK SYSTEM OF GUNTUR: NETWORK INDICES

ALPHA INDEX (α) = (e-v+1) / (2v-5)

• 5 Tazs – 1,2,3,4,11 have less beta index values

• 8 Tazs – 27, 29, 30, 36, 43, 45, 50, 54 have higher than the average number of cycles

BETA INDEX (β) = e/v

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Amaravati 23 GAMMA INDEX Amaravati ETA INDEX GAMMA INDEX (ү) = e / 3 (v-2) Inference: This measure of connectivity that considers the relationship between the number of observed links and the number of possible links. The value of gamma is between 0 and 1 where a value of 1 indicates a completely connected network and would be extremely unlikely. Gamma is an efficient value to measure the progression of a network in time. ETA (n) = road length / number of links Inference: Eta Index is a measure of Average length per link. Adding new nodes will cause a decrease of Eta as the average length per link declines. Complex networks tend to have a low eta value. • 6 Tazs – 1,2,3,4,7,11 have less Gamma index • 8 Tazs – 27, 29, 30, 36, 43, 45, 50, 54 have higher values • 6 Tazs – 1,2,3,4,5,7 have less Eta index values • 6 Tazs – 24, 38,39,40,41,42 have higher Eta index NETWORK INDICES GURURAJA-2200600053

√v – 1)^ 2

•

GRID TREE PROPORTION = (e-v+1)/ (

– v

Cyclomatic number (µ) = e + 1

Cyclomatic number is a different way of measuring connectivity. This is based upon the condition that as soon as a connected network has enough arcs or links to form a tree, then any additional arcs will result in the formation of circuits.

Trees and simple networks have a value of 0 since they have no cycles. The more complex a network is, the higher the value of u, so it can be used as an indicator of the level of development and complexity of a transport system. 6 Tazs – 1,2,3,4,7,11 have less GTP index i.e having dominant tree pattern type of network 8 Tazs – 27, 29, 30, 36, 43, 45, 50, 54 have higher GTP values i.e. these have Grid pattern road network. Tazs – 5, 6, 8, 13 have highest cyclomatic number NETWORK INDICES

•

• 4

Grid Tree Pattern index is a measure for identifying the pattern of the network, varying from 0 in the case of tree pattern to 1 in the case of grid pattern.

GURURAJA-2200600053

CYCLOMATIC NUMBER Amaravati

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ALPHA INDEX vs. NETWORK DENSITY BETA INDEX vs. NETWORK DENSITY Index Minimum Maximum Mean Std . Deviation Connectivity Indices ALPHA 0.09 0.31 0.19 0.05 BETA 1.19 1.61 1.37 0.10 GAMMA 0.40 0.54 0.46 0.03 ETA 0.03 0.09 0.06 0.01 GTP 0.20 0.74 0.43 0.13 Covera ge Index Network Size (kms) 5.72 225.59 36.21 41.23 Network Density (km/ Sqkm) 4.64 59.22 26.49 10.88 Correlation of Connectivity Indices with Network Density ALPHA BETA GAMMA ETA GTP Density(km/Sqkm)Network 0.59 0.58 0.60 0.87 0.63 Descriptive Statistics: Spearman’s Rho Correlation Coefficients : Assessment of Topological Pattern of Guntur Topology pattern of the city as a whole INDEX Index value TAZ lesser Greater ALPHA 0.16 14 40 BETA 1.328 15 39 GAMMA 0.44 14 40 ETA 0.064 43 11 GTP 0.332 13 41 Network Density(km/Sqkm) 14.05 7 47 NETWORK INDICES Inferences: Graphs shows that indices as Alpha, Beta, Gamma and GTP grow with Network Density while Eta index declines with Network Density. with R^2 values varying between 0.34 to 0.87. • This supports the fact that more the road length per unit area, more will be the connections. • Eta index reduces with Network Density because of the fact that more the connections, less will be the average link length. GURURAJA-2200600053 25

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 26N GAMMAALPHABETA DENSITYGTPETA OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF TOPOLOGY / ROAD NETWORK DEVELOPMENT INFERENCE: • It is observed that Zones near the Central Business District have high values of connectivity and road transport development because of the intense development of activities. While the outer suburban zones have very less transport system development. • TAZs – 1,2,3,4,6,7,15 having very less Transport system development i.e. TAZs having less alpha, beta, gamma, GTP, Network Density and more ETA are to be given more focus for future network development compensations spatially NETWORK INDICES GURURAJA-2200600053

Fig.

INFERENCE Shimbel index value is moderate in the TAZ 14,3,40,18, 52,51,25,10,19, 20 ,4 ,3 but the accessibility of these regions is not so flourished in comparison to the adjoining city core as the Shimbel index value is moderate. It is evident from the shimbel index value that TAZ 1, 2, 6,7, 5 and 9 having low level of accessibility. The peripheral most portion of the block having low level of accessibility . The most accessible TAZ 50,30,31,32,34,45,16,21,26,20,48,47,44 etc falls in the city center. ACCESSIBILITY INDEX Index HAYCELIN-2200600040

Shimbel index is used to determine the accessibility of the network, which represents the summation of the length of all the shortest path distances among all points (nodes) in a network. Lower the value of shimbel index indicates higher the accessibility and vice versa. Shimbel index is expressed as: = ��=1 ��

Shimbel

Accessibility of a network can be understood by measuring the level of connectivity a network offers. To understand the well accessible and worst accessible region within the study area Shimbel index is used. Accessibility measurement of the study area using shimbel index

��

It is defined as: where, 1. Ai is the normalized Hansen integral accessibility index, normalized by total attractiveness, for zone i; 2. Bj is the attractiveness of zone j; (e.g., the number of opportunities available at j); 3. f(Cij) is the impedance function that represents the separation. between the two zones. f(Cij) = 1/xij , where xij is the travel distance between two zones.

The normalized Hansen integral accessibility index is a gravity-based accessibility measure .

The Hansen accessibility index measures the accessibility of a location based on the opportunity available along with the spatial separation. It can be inferred from the map that low accessibility of peripheral area is due to the land use as well as the lack of connectivity. City core has a high value of HAI.

TAZ wise landuse map ACCESSIBILITY INDEX HAYCELIN-2200600040

Inference

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N G AB C DEAF J K L H I 1 2 SPEED AND DELAY 19.660 28.1719.66 28.17 66.3266.32706050403020100 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Guntur to Chilkalooripeta speedgrunninavg.speedgrunninspeedyjourneavg.speedyjourne 23.380 32.4323.3859.7232.43 59.72706050403020100 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Guntur to Bapatla journey speed avg. journey speed running speed avg. running speed NODE speed(Km/hr)journey speed(Km/hr)running ORIGIN-A 19.668 23.513 A-B 28.171 30.882 B-C 66.327 66.327 Average 38.055 40.241NODE speed(Km/hr)journey speed(Km/hr)running ORIGIN – J 23.381 29.148 J-K 32.432 34.951 K-L 59.722 59.722 Average 38.512 41.274 2 SPEED AND DELAY ❖ Origin is considered as Guntur Junction. ❖ The nodes are considered 6 min, 9 min and 12 min apart in all 4 corridors. 29 PRANJAL-2200600047

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N G AB C DE F A J K L H I 30 3 3 4 4 SPEED AND DELAY 51.84 51.84 51.8451.84 0 10 80706050403020 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Guntur to Vijayawada journey speed avg. journey speed running speed avg. running speed 38.45 38.4538.45 38.45 20100 30 605040 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Guntur to Sattenapalli journey speedrunningavg.speedrunningspeedjourneyavg.speed NODE speed(Km/hr)journey speed(Km/hr)running ORIGIN – G 28.718 35.220 G-H 45.517 52.381 H-I 65.455 67.925 Average 46.563 51.842 NODE speed(Km/hr)journey speed(Km/hr)running ORIGIN – D 22.137 28.713 D-E 40.323 42.373 E-F 52.893 52.893 Average 38.45 41.33 Nodes JOURNEY SPEED(KM/HR) RUNNING SPEED(KM/HR) A D G J 23.5 29.1 B E H K 36.6 40.1 C F I L 61.1 61.7 SPEED AND DELAY PRANJAL-2200600047

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 31N ISOCHRONE MAP • Propagation speed considered : 30 km/h • Destination is taken as TAZs 31, 32 & 46, which loosely includes the CBD area. INFERENCE • The areas that are relatively far in terms of ‘time taken to reach city centre from’ are majorly agricultural land use. SPEED AND DELAY PRANJAL-2200600047

TRAFFIC CHARACTERISTICS

➢ It is the average number of vehicles that travel through a specific point of a road over a short duration time period (often 7 days or less). It is estimated by dividing the total daily volumes during a specified time period by the number of days in the period.

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 32N Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 Traffic volume count Survey It includes counting the number of vehicles passing through a survey station. The study of Classified Traffic Volume Count is to understand factors that form the basis of ➢ To check efficiency , LOS & capacity ➢ Use of road network by different vehicles ➢ Need for Median shifting and road widening In order to assess the traffic characteristics of the study area classified traffic volume counts and origin destination studies were carried out at a number of locations ➢ Outer cordon count ➢ Midblock count ➢ Screen line Its assessment aids in appreciating the need for organizing the traffic in an efficient and economical manner. It is usually expressed in terms of ➢ Average Daily Traffic (ADT), ➢ Traffic Composition, ➢ Peak Hour, ➢ Directional Distribution TECHNICAL TERMS Vehicular Composition ➢ Vehicular Composition is the percentage of particular type of vehicle for transportation or number of trips made by using that particular type of Mode. Traffic Flow ➢ It is expressed as number of vehicles using the particular road per unit duration of one hour. Passenger Car Unit (PCU) ➢ Passenger Car Unit (PCU) or Passenger Car Equivalent (PCE) is a metric used in Transportation Engineering, to assess traffic flow rate on a highway. ➢ A Passenger Car Unit is a measure of the impact that a mode of transport has on traffic variables (such as headway, speed, density) compared to a single standard passenger car. This is also known as passenger car equivalent. ➢ Highway capacity is measured in PCU/hour daily. ➢ As per HCM (Highway capacity Manual )PCU’s are calculated using STREAMLINE EQUIVALENT equation. Level Of Service (LOS) ➢ When capacity gives a quantitative measure of traffic, level of service or LOS tries to give a qualitative measure. ➢ A service volume is the maximum number of vehicles, passengers, or the like, which can be accommodated by a given facility or system under given conditions at a given level of service. ➢ The intention of LOS is to relate the traffic service quality to a given flow rate of traffic. ➢ It divides the quality of traffic into six levels ranging form level A to level F. ➢ LOS of Multilane Divided Urban Roads based on Stream Speed, V/C Ratio and FFS based on CRRI guidelines TVC ANALYSIS – TECHNICAL TERMS

Average Daily Traffic

Volume-demand-to-capacity Ratio (V/C)

➢ It is a measure that reflects mobility and quality of travel of a facility or a section of a facility. It compares roadway demand (vehicle volumes) with roadway supply (carrying capacity). RANGE OF V/C : 0 to 1 Source: Indo HCM

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 33N ➢ After collection of data calculate the streamline equivalent for each lane at that particular cordon. ��(��)= ��/�� /�� TVC ANALYSIS Stream Equivalency Factor For Undivided Roads Se = 1 0.85*PTW 0.31*PAuto + 0.60*PLCV + 3.09*PBus + 1.06*PHV 1.30*PNMT 1.29*(1/N) Stream Equivalency Factor For Divided Roads Se = 1 0.77*PTW 0.28*PAuto + 0.53*PLCV + 2.60*PBus + 1.83*PHV 0.66*PNMT + 12.71*(1/N) Where, Se = Stream Equivalency Factor PTW = Percentage composition of Motorized Two Wheelers PAuto = Percentage composition of Motorized Three Wheelers PLCV = Percentage composition of Light Commercial Vehicles i.e LCV and Mini buses PBus = Percentage composition of Buses P HV = Percentage composition of Heavy vehicles i.e TAT, MAT and TT. PNMT = Percentage composition of Non Motorized Vehicles i.e. Bicycle and Cycle rickshaw N = Total volume in vehicles per hour S. No. Typology of the Road Capacity Lane Capacity Design(PCUs/VolumeServicehr)(PCUs/hr) (PCUs/hr) 1 Two lane Undivided 2400 1200 1680 2 Four lane Divided 5400 (2700) 1350 3780 (1890) 3 Six lane Divided 8400 (4200) 1400 5880 (2940) 4 Eight lane Divided 13600 (6800) 1700 9520 (4760) 5 Ten lane Divided 20000 (10000) 2000 14000 (7000) Note: The values in parenthesis / brackets represent PCUs per hour per direction Capacity Of Base Sections Of Urban Roads Methodology for the Determination of Capacity and LOS of Urban Roads PEAK HOUR FACTOR ➢ A ratio of the volume occurring during the peak hour to the peak rate of flow during a given time period within the peak hour (typically, 1 hour, 15 minutes or 5 minutes). ➢ Typical peak hour factors for freeways range between 0.80 and 0.95. ➢ Lower factors are more typical for rural freeways or off peak conditions. Higher factors are typical of urban and suburban peak hour conditions. Data Input Presence of Median Number of lanes Types of Roadside Frictions, if any Field measurement of Flow & Speed Field measurement of Free Flow Speed of Cars Refer Base Capacity Table from Indo HCM Use PCU Values Table from Indo HCM Stream Equivalency Factor Estimation of Hourly Flow in PCUs Speed Flow relationship Determination of Roadway Capacity Speed Flow relationship Estimation of Operating Speed and Capacity from operating Speed lane Capacity Model Application of appropriate Adjustment Factors (if any) Source: Indo HCM TVC ANALYSIS Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 34N Expected Outcomes : 1) Total Traffic. (In and Out) 2) Peak Hour Characteristics. ➢ Peak Hour Time. ➢ Peak Hour Volume. ➢ Peak Hour Share ➢ Peak Hour factor 3) Directional Split. 4) Traffic Composition ➢ Vehicular Composition. ➢ Hourly Variation. 5) Volume/Capacity Ratios and LOS Outer CordonPoints Road Name Type Carriagewayof Duration (24 Hrs) OC1 GNT VijaywadaNH5 10 DividedLane 8:00 am 8:00 am (2006) OC2 PraltipaduRoad 4 DividedLane 8:00 am 8:00 am (2006 & 2017) OC3 Tenali 4 DividedLane 8:00 am 8:00 am (2006) OC4 GNT ChennaiNH 10 DividedLane 8:00 am 8:00 am (2006) OC5 Nandiveligu 4 DividedLane 8:00 am 8:00 am (2006) OC6 Narsaraopet 4 DividedLane 8:00 am 8:00 am (2006 & 2017) OC7 Amravati Road 4 DividedLane 8:00 am 8:00 am (2006) Cordon Points , Their Location And Duration Of Survey ScreenPointsline Road Name Type Carriagewayof Duration(16Hrs) SL1 ShankarFlyoverVilas (Brodipet) 4 dividedLane 6:00am 10:00Pm (2006 & 2017) SL2 Dunka Road (Muduvanthanallu) 4 Lane Divided 6:00am 10:00Pm (2006 & 2017) SL3 BridgeKankaragutta(railwaycrossing) 4 DividedLane 6:00am 10:00Pm (2006 & 2017) MidPointsBlock Road Name Type Carriagewayof Duration (16 Hrs) MB1 GNT Road 10 Lane divided 6:00am 10:00Pm (2006 8hrs) MB2 Gujjangulla 4 DividedLane 6:00am 10:00Pm (2006 & 2017) OC1 – 26.14% OC4-16.26% OC6-15.57% OC7-15.19% OC3 12.67% OC2 – 9.36% MB 2 MB 1 SL 3 SL 1 SL 2 TVC Survey locations: Traffic Volume Count Survey locations Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 V/C Ratio LOS <0.15 LOS A 0.16 0.45 LOS B 0.46 0.75 LOS C 0.76 0.85 LOS D 0.86 1.00 LOS E >1 LOS F

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 3N5 TVC Survey at Outer Cordon Points of Guntur: Location IDLocation Direction WidthCarriageway PCU)(inCapacity 2006 2006 2018 2021 Share(%)HrPeak FactorhourPeak TimeHourPeak(InADTDirectional )Vehicle (InADTDirectional PCU) DailyAverage (In(ADT)Traffic Vehicle) DailyAverage PCU)(ADT)(InTraffic PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS DailyAverage PCU)(ADT)(InTraffic PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS DailyAverage PCU)(ADT)(InTraffic PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS NH-16 OC1 IN 26.1 m 20000 13900 27068 29501 59225 3776 0.19 B 126031 8035 0.40 B 153097 9761 0.49 C 6.38% OUT 15601 32157 Prattipadu Road OC2 IN 15.2 m 5400 4868 5466 10564 12068 950 0.18 B 25681 2022 0.37 B 31196 2456 0.45 B 7.87% 0.49 9:4510:45OUT 5696 6602 Tenali OC3 IN 16 m 5400 8727 13368 14302 21994 1995 0.37 B 46803 4245 0.79 D 56854 5157 0.96 E 9.07% OUT 5575 8626 GNT-NH Chennai OC4 IN 26.1 m 20000 9371 22268 18352 44105 2840 0.14 A 93855 6044 0.30 B 114011 7341 0.37 B 6.44% OUT 8981 21837 Nandivelu OC5 IN 16 m 5400 2904 3364 5428 6254 444 0.08 A 13309 945 0.17 B 16167 1148 0.21 B 7.10% OUT 2524 2890 Narsaraopeta OC6 IN 16.4 m 5400 8561 14015 17566 27117 1687 0.31 B 57705 3590 0.66 C 70097 4361 0.81 D 6.22% 0.91 2:453:45OUT 9005 13102 Amaravati Road OC7 IN 15 m 5400 8328 9751 17138 18539 1484 0.27 B 39451 3158 0.58 C 47923 3836 0.71 C 8.00% OUT 8810 8788 TVC Survey at Outer Cordon Points Inference : • For OC 3 ( Tenali), traffic volume is more than traffic capacity and LOS is E • Peak hour Factor for OC 2 is 0.49 and OC 6 is 0..91. • Peak Hour Share for OC points lies between 6.22% to 9.07% . Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 Variations in V/C ratio 0.19 0.18 0.37 0.14 0.08 0.31 0.27 0.4 0.37 0.79 0.3 0.17 0.66 0.58 0.49 0.45 0.96 0.37 0.21 0.81 0.71 OC1 OC2 OC3 OC4 OC5 OC6 OC7 2006 2018 2021

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 36N TVC Survey at Mid Block Points of Guntur: Location IDLocation Direction WidthCarriageway PCU)(inCapacity 2006 2006 2018 2021 Share(%)HrPeak FactorhourPeak TimeHourPeakDirectional VEHICLE(8hr) PCU(8hr)Total AverageDirectional (ADT)(InTrafficDaily PCU) TrafficDailyAverage PCU)(ADT)(In PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS TrafficDailyAverage PCU)(ADT)(In PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS TrafficDailyAverage PCU)(ADT)(In PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS GNT Road MB1 Guntur to Chilakalurpet 26.1 m 20000 3556 6495 13483 27332 1961 0.10 A 58163 4173 0.21 B 70654 5069 0.25 B 14.89 MB1 Chilakalurpet to Guntur 3744 6671 13849 Gujjanagulla Road MB2 Guntur to Palakalur 15.2 m 5400 2549 1882 3907 7808 605 0.11 A 16615 1287 0.24 B 20183 1564 0.29 B 16.07 0.92 5:15 6:15PMMB2 Palakalur to Guntur 2549 1879 3901 TVC Survey at Mid Block Points Inference : • For the Both Mid Block points traffic volume is less than traffic capacity for base year 2021. • Peak hour Factor for MB2 is 0.92 & Peak hour share lies between 14 16% Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 Variations in V/C ratio 0.1 0.11 0.21 0.240.25 0.29 MB1 MB2 2006 2018 2021

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 37NTVC Survey at Screen Line Points Location IDLocation Direction WidthCarriageway PCU)(inCapacity 2006 2006 2018 2021 Share(%)HrPeak FactorhourPeak TimeHourPeakDirectional Vehicle(16hr) PCU(16hr)Total Directional DailyAverage (ADT)(InTraffic PCU) DailyAverage (ADT)(InTraffic PCU) PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS DailyAverage (ADT)(InTraffic PCU) PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS DailyAverage (ADT)(InTraffic PCU) PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS Brodipet SL1 Brodipet to CollegeAC 5400 36046 28915 34766 64829 4902 0.91 E 137955 10431 1.93 F 167582 12672 2.35 F 9.09 0.94 10:1511:15AMSL1 AC College to Brodipet 32098 25003 30063 Muduvanthanallu SL2 Kothepeta Arundelpetto 5400 19556 16870 20284 38370 3032 0.56 C 81651 6452 1.19 F 99185 7838 1.45 F 11.28 0.98 7:006:00PMSL2 ArundelpetKothepetato 17586 15042 18086 Railway Crossing SL3 Kankarguta to Brodipet 5400 13338 9336 11225 32300 2939 0.54 C 68735 6254 1.16 F 83496 7597 1.41 F 9.21 0.93 9:0010:00AMSL3 Brodipet Kankargutato 20722 17528 21075 TVC Survey at Screen Line Points of Guntur: Inference : • For the all Screen Line points traffic volume is greater than traffic capacity for the base year 2021. • Peak hour Factor for SL1, SL2,SL3 are 0.94,0.98,0.93 respectively & Peak hour share lies between 9 12% Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 0.91 0.56 0.54 1.93 1.19 1.16 2.35 1.45 1.41 SL1 SL2 SL3 2006 2018 2021 Variations in V/C ratio

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 38N PCU, Volume Count, V/C ratio & Vehicular Composition Inference : • Maximum Traffic is observed at SL 1 and minimum is observed at OC 5 throughout the day. • OC 1 & SL 1 are the busiest road compared to other points. V/C ratio values of some cordon points are more than one ,it means they are not satisfying the existing Traffic volume. • Maximum share of 2 wheeler is at Screen line point 2 • Maximum share of 4 wheeler is at Outer cordon point 2 and Screen line point 3. • NMT is almost negligible on all the points. Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 153097 31196 56854 114011 16167 70097 47923 70654 20183 167582 99185 8349676260 27308 36971 47440 14031 45408 44302 39175 27358 211798 115441 105862 OC1 OC2 OC3 OC4 OC5 OC6 OC7 MB1 MB2 SL1 SL2 SL3 PCU Vehicle Count PCU & Vehicle Count PCU & V / C Ratio 15309731196 5685411401116167 70097 47923 70654 2018316758299185 83496 0.49 0.45 0.96 0.37 0.21 0.81 0.71 0.25 0.29 5.281.45 1.41 21.510.50 2.5 65.554.543.53180000160000140000120000100000800006000040000200000 OC1 OC2 OC3 OC4 OC5 OC6 OC7 MB1 MB2 SL1 SL2 SL3 ratioV/CPCU/Hour PCU V/C Ratio 90%80%70%60%50%40%30%20%10%0% 100% OC:2 OC:6 SL 1 SL 2 SL 3 MB 2 Cycle 2W 3W 4W Bus Mini Bus LCV Tractor Truck Vehicle Composition of SL, MB and OC points

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 39N Traffic Composition at Outer Cordon Points (2021) Traffic Composition at Outer cordon & Mid block Location ID. Outer locationscordon Passenger Goods OverallTotalFast Slow Total % share ofVehpass.. Fast Slow Total % share ofVehgoods. 1 GNT VijaywadaNH 51090 1789 52879 69 23376 5 23381 31 76260 2 PraltipaduRoad 17684 6289 23973 88 3208 127 3335 12 27308 3 Tenali 26760 2464 29223 79 7659 88 7747 21 36971 4 GNT ChennaiNH 26253 1388 27641 58 19796 3 19799 42 47440 5 Nandivelu 10353 1947 12299 88 1691 41 1732 12 14031 6 Narsarapet 32579 3805 36384 80 8923 101 9024 20 45408 7 AmravatiRoad 33290 7132 40422 91 3818 62 3880 9 44302 69 88 79 58 88 80 91 31 12 21 42 12 20 9706050403020100 80 10090 Traffic composition at Outer Cordon point % ofsharepass. Veh. % share of goods Veh. Traffic Composition at Mid Block Points (2021) ID.Location Mid block locations Passenger Goods Overall Total Fast Slow Total % share ofVehpass.. Fast Slow Total % share ofVehgoods. 1 GNT Road 12486 670 13155 70 5715 0 5715 30 18871 2 Gujjangulla 9890 4069 13959 98 259 78 336 2 14295 70 98 30 2200 40 1201008060 GNT Road Gujjangulla Traffic composition at Mid Block point % share of pass. Veh. % share of goods Veh. Inference: • Traffic composition at outer cordon indicates that each of the location at Tenali and GNT NH Vijayawada have a higher proportion of goods traffic with share of 42% and 31% respectively. • At Amravati road Passenger traffic is having higher proportion with share of 91%. Inference: • Traffic composition at Mid Block indicates that at GNT road having a higher proportion of goods traffic with share of 30%. • At Gujjangulla road Passenger traffic is having higher proportion with share of 98%. Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 40N Traffic Composition at SL Points & Directional Distribution of Traffic at OC Points Traffic Composition at Screen Line Points (2021) ID.Location Screenlocationsline Passenger Goods OverallTotalFast Slow Total % share ofVehpass.. Fast Slow Total % share ofVehgoods. 1 Brodipet 151833 22851 174684 99 1430 39 1468 1 176152 2 Muduvanthanallu 56356 37071 93427 97 1396 1189 2585 3 96012 3 CrossingRailway 60316 25064 85380 97 2068 597 2665 3 88045 99 97 97 1 3 3100806040200 120 Brodipet MuduvanthanalluRailway Crossing Traffic composition at Screen Line point % share of pass. Veh. % share of goods Veh. Directional Distribution of Traffic at Outer Cordon Points (2021): 47.12 46.08 61.02 51.06 53.50 48.74 48.59 52.88 53.92 38.98 48.94 46.50 51.26 51.4170.0060.0050.0040.0030.0020.0010.000.00percentage To FromGunturGuntur Inference: • Traffic composition at Screen Line Points having a higher proportion of Passenger traffic with share of 97 99%. • All the screen line points having very less percentage of goods traffic. Inference: • Maximum directional traffic variation has been observed at Tenali road with 61% share on direction 1(towards Guntur City) and rest on direction 2 (from city). • There is no major directional imbalance ( in – 50.20% , out – 49.80% ) at different points along the Outer Cordon. Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 Total no. of vehicles entering the study area = 146464 Total no. of vehicles exiting the study area = 145256

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 41N Directional Distribution at Screen line Points and Mid Block points Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 at Mid Block Points: 48.71 50.0051.29 50.0060.0050.0040.0030.0020.0010.000.00 GNT Road Gujjangulla Percentage Direction-1 Direction-2 Inference: • GNT road displays traffic directional split in the ratio of 51:49 while at Gujjangundla the ratio is 50:50. at Screen Line Points: 52.90 52.65 39.16 47.10 47.35 60.8470.0060.0050.0040.0030.0020.0010.000.00Percentage Direction-1 Direction-2 Inference: • The directional split observed near Railway Crossing is the maximum with a ratio of 39:61 whereas Brodipet comes in the next order with a ratio of 54:46. Muduvanthanallu shows the minimum difference of 6% as direction 1 (53%) and direction 2 (47%)

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 42N 1 2 3 5 4 6 879 1011 14 131512 16 1 Gujjanagundla junction 2 Stambal Puram 3 NTR stadium 4 Lodge centre 5 Chuttuguta 6 Three statue junction 7 Naaz centre 8 Ethurot Centre 9 GMC 1 10 GMC 2 11 Jinnah tower 12 Maya bazar 13 NTR statue 14 RTC junction 15 BR Stadium 16 Bara Imam junction Locations of intersections taken up for Turning movement survey Locations of intersections taken up for Turning movement survey Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 43N Sl. No. Intersection Type Junction/Intersectionsof dSignalised/Unsignalise/Roundabout/Flyover 2006 2018 2021 Peak Hour (PCU)Traffic Peak Hour (PCU)Traffic Peak Hour (PCU)Traffic Morning Evening Morning Evening Morning Evening 1 Chuttuguta Three Arm Signalised & Roundabout 3714 3780 7903 8044 9601 9771 2 Ethurot Centre Three Arm Signalised 4552 4172 9687 8878 11767 10785 3 GMC 1 Three Arm signalized & Roundabout 5985 6528 12736 13892 15471 16875 4 GMC 2 Three Arm Unsignalized 7810 8500 16620 18088 20189 21973 5 Gujjanagundla junction Three Arm Signalised & Roundabout 2042 1728 4345 3677 5279 4467 6 Jinnah tower Four Arm Unsignalized & Divided road one way 6634 6819 14117 14511 17149 17627 7 Lodge centre Five Arm Signalised & Roundabout 6442 5963 13709 12689 16653 15414 8 BR Stadium Three Arm Unsignalized 2786 2986 5929 6354 7202 7719 9 Maya bazar Three Arm Unsignalized & Divided road one way 2772 2978 5899 6337 7166 7698 10 Naaz centre Five Arm Unsignalized & Roundabout 5317 6028 11315 12828 13744 15582 11 NTR stadium Four Arm Unsignalized 3076 2665 6546 5671 7951 6889 12 NTR statue Three Arm Roundabout 2841 2851 6046 6067 7344 7370 13 Stambal Puram Three Arm Unsignalized & Roundabout 1157 1473 2462 3135 2991 3808 14 Three statue junction Three Arm Unsignalized & Roundabout 3246 2603 6907 5539 8391 6729 15 RTC junction Four Arm Unsignalized 3424 3654 7286 7776 8851 9446 16 Bara Imam junction Three Arm Unsignalized 1407 1160 2994 2468 3637 2999 TMC Survey at Intersection Points of Guntur: ▪ In 2006, Intersection Turning movement survey were conducted on 16 locations for 8 hrs. ▪ With the help of Econometric method the forecasted data of traffic Volume at junctions, The growth rate for 2018 & 2021 are 2.128 & 2.585 respectively. ▪ Maximum traffic Volume is at GMC 2 with PCU value 21973 for evening and Minimum Traffic Volume is at Stambal Puram with PCU value 2991 for base year 202. Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 TMC Survey at Intersection Points of Guntur

CHARACTERISTICSTRAVEL (HOUSEHOLD)

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR AGE COMPOSITION About 43% of the population has 21-40 yrs age group SEX RATIO Almost 52% of the HH have male population Totalpopulation(2021) 1029813 Totalsamplepopulation 2178 TotalHH 674 AverageHHsize 3.23 DEMOGRAPHIC & SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS VEHICLE DISTRIBUTION Almost 58% of the HH have only 2 wheelers 79.74 16.7 3.28 0.3 0 20 40 60 80 100 4321 % OF HOUSEHOLDS EARNERSOFNO. DISTRIBUTION OF HH BY EARNERS Most of the families have a single earner 2.08 46.15 0.45 19.89 1.793.277.13 18.85 0.45 0 10 20 30 40 50 1500 1501 - 3000 3001 - 5000 5001 - 10000 10001 - 20000 20001 - 30000 30001 - 40000 40001 - 50000 More than 50001 DISTRIBUTION OF HH BY INCOME (Rs./Month) 46% of the families have an average income of Rs.2000/month 19.91 36.0228.88 11.25 2.58 1.06 0.3 DISTRIBUTION OF HH BY EXPENDITURE ON TRANSPORT upto500 501-1000 1001-2000 2001-3000 3001-4000 4001-5000 Morethan5000 36% of the families spend 1000-2000Rs on transportation. 1.19 32.7923.337.84 4.01 0.75 0.15 DISTRIBUTION OH HH BY FAMILY MEMBERS 1 More65432than6 The average HH size is 3.23 300000.00250000.00200000.00150000.00100000.0050000.000.000.00 500000.00 1000000.00 1500000.00 2000000.00 EXPENDITURE ON TRANSPORTATION VS INCOME KRISHNA-2200600046 HOUSEHOLD ANALYSIS 44

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TRIP CHARACTERISTICS 7.47, Walk 2.19, Bicycle 0.11, Cycle31.31rickshaw,Auto Rickshaw 36.03, 2W(Driver) 0.512W(Passenger)1.73,,Car,Van(Driver)0.06,Car,Van(Passenger)0.06, Taxi 3.71, Mini bus 16.72, Govt. bus 0.16, Private bus MODE SHARE Walk Bicycle Cycle rickshaw Auto PrivateGovt.MiniTaxiCar,Van(Passenger)Car,Van(Driver)2W(Passenger)2W(Driver)Rickshawbusbusbus EducationplaceworkTo30%24%Shopping 20% Others26% DISTRIBUTION OF TRIPS BY PURPOSE To work place Education Shopping Others 0.00 20.00 40.00 120.00100.0080.0060.00 15 30 45 60 75 90 105 120 135 150 165 180 195 %INCF TIME IN MINUTES TRAVEL TIME DISTRIBUTIONFREQUENCY 806040200 100 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 %inCF Distance in km TRIP LENGTH DISTRIBUTIONFREQUENCY ➢ 2W (driver) has the maximum percentage of mode share (36.3%), followed by Auto Rickshaw (31.31%). ➢ Percentage of trip purpose shows that, majority of the trips are work trips i.e. 30% followed by educational trips i.e. 24%. ➢ Overall average journey speed from the TTFD graph is 26 minutes. ➢ Average trip length from the TLFD graph is 9.03 kms. ➢ Average trip length including NMT is 9.05 km and by excluding NMT is 9.73 km. ➢ The average trip length of each mode is between 5-15 km as per the CF TLFD curve. 110.00%100.00%90.00%80.00%70.00%60.00%50.00%40.00%30.00%20.00%10.00%0.00% 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 %INCF DISTANCE IN KMS CF TLFD (MODEWISE) (CAR,VAN_d)(AUTO_r)(2WP)(2WD)(BUS_G)(MINIBUS) MODE ATL (KM) ATT (MIN) 2-wheeler (driver) 9.53 26 2-wheeler (passenger) 11.52 31.42 Auto rickshaw 8.95 24.42 Bicycle 6.58 18.11 Bus (govt.) 11.17 30.46 Car, van (driver) 11.17 30.45 Car, van (passenger) 11.00 30 Cycle rickshaw 2.44 30 Mini bus 10.65 29.05 Walk 1.08 13.55 Sample population 2178 Sample trips 2071 PCTR (with NMT) 0.95 PCTR (without NMT) 0.86 Average travel time (overall) = 25min, 44 secs Average trip length (overall) = 9.05 kms Overall average journey speed = 22 km/hr. PURPOSE ATL(KM) EDUCATION 9.61 WORK 9.39 SHOPPING 9.51 OTHERS 7.75 KRISHNASHASHANKGAUTAMI-2200600046-2200600051TRIP CHARACTERISTICS ANALYSIS 45

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TRIP CHARACTERISTICS 36.56 44.59 12.56 5.44 0.87 0 10 20 30 40 50 upto 15 minutes 16 - 30 minutes 31 - 4546minutes-1hour More than 1 hour % OF TRIPS TIMETRAVEL DISTRIBUTION OF TRIPS BY TRAVEL TIME Inernal InernalExternalto7%toInternal75%ExternalInternalto7% ExternalExternalto 11% 4123.41 5813.05 4873.2 3928.73 10000 2000 70006000500040003000 OTHER WORK EDUCATION SHOPPING PURPOSE WISE TRIP LENGTH IN KM MODE TRIPS % TRIPS EDUCATION OTHERS SHOPPING WORK 2-WHEELER 827 39.93 105 190 62 470 AUTO RICKSHAW 621 29.99 131 139 279 72 BICYCLE 45 2.17 16 15 4 10 BUS (GOVT.) 344 16.61 153 99 49 43 CAR, VAN 12 0.58 6 1 5 CYCLE RICKSHAW 1 0.04 1 MINI BUS 74 3.57 69 3 1 1 WALK 147 7.09 33 80 17 17 TIME (MIN) 0 5 7 8 10 12 15 20 25 29 30 35 36 40 45 50 55 60 75 90 95 120 130 180 2-WHEELER 4 12 51 234 105 54 186 39 38 40 25 12 19 2 3 1 1 1 AUTO RICKSHAW 2 7 1 4 54 1 171 96 45 1 122 25 1 36 27 9 10 7 1 1 BICYCLE 1 5 22 8 9 BUS (GOVT.) 73 21 9 181 6 4 19 2 22 2 2 1 2 CAR, VAN 2 1 8 1 CYCLE RICKSHAW 1 MINI BUS 2 20 4 30 3 4 9 1 1 WALK 21 1 52 56 8 5 1 1 2 ➢ The percentage share of internal to internal trips is highest i.e. 75%. ➢ The TT of 44.59% trips is between 16-30 mins, while 36.56% trips has the TT up to 15 mins. ➢ The travel distance of work trips is higher i.e. 5813.05 kms, followed by educational trips i.e. 4873.2 kms. ➢ 39.93% trips are made from 2WH followed by auto rickshaw i.e. 30% for different purposes like work, education, shopping etc. ➢ 234 trips are made by 2W within 15 mins, 186 trips are made within 30 mins and 105 trips are done within 20 min respectively. ➢ 171 trips are made by auto-rickshaw within 15 mins, 122 trips are made within 30 mins and 96 trips are done within 20 min respectively. TRIP CHARACTERISTICS ANALYSIS KRISHNASHASHANKGAUTAMI-2200600046-2200600051 46

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ➢ Because these TAZs are closer to the CBD area of Guntur, the bulk of the population prefers to use 2-W for various purposes. ➢ The predominant land use considering all these TAZs is Residential but also have other land uses like commercial, industrial, public-semi public etc. TRIP CHARACTERISTICS DISTANCE 0.0 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.8 1.2 1.6 1.8 2.4 2.4 2.6 2.9 3.2 3.7 4.0 4.4 4.8 5.5 7.3 9.2 10.6 11.0 12.8 13.2 14.7 16.5 18.3 20.2 22.0 27.5 33.0 34.8 44.0 47.7 66.0 2 WHEELER 4 12 51 234 105 54 186 39 38 40 25 12 19 2 3 1 1 1 AUTO RICKSHAW 2 7 1 4 54 1 171 96 45 1 122 25 1 36 27 9 10 7 1 1 BICYCLE 1 1 4 22 8 9 BUS (GOVT.) 73 21 9 181 6 4 19 2 22 2 2 1 2 CAR, VAN (DRIVER) 2 1 8 1 CYCLE RICKSHAW 1 MINI BUS 2 20 4 30 3 4 9 1 1 WALK 21 1 52 56 8 5 1 1 2 TAZ WISE 2W OWNERSHIP ➢ Guntur has high 2WH ownership, especially in TAZs TAZ 14, 13, 20, 24, 15 and 44 ➢ From the table above, it can be observed that 234, 105 and 186 trips are performed by 2-W up to a distance of 5.5 km, 7.3 km and 11km respectively. ➢ From the Auto Rickshaw, 171, 96, 122 trips are made up to a distance of 5.5 km, 7.3 km and 11km. ➢ 93 trips are made up to a distance of 5.5 km, whereas 211 trips are made up to 11 km from the buses i.e. the public transport. ➢ The highest percentage of 2-W trips i.e. 56.83%, are recorded for work purposes. TRIP CHARACTERISTICS ANALYSIS KRISHNASHASHANKGAUTAMI-2200600046-2200600051 47

➢

KRISHNA

VEHICLE

The predominant land use considering all these TAZs is Residential but also have other land uses like commercial, industrial, public semi public etc. Because these TAZs are closer to the CBD area of Guntur, therefore most of the population prefers to use cycle for various purposes. OWNERSHIP SHASHANKGAUTAMI-2200600046-2200600051

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TAZ WISE CYCLE OWNERSHIP ➢ TAZs having higher percentage of cycle are 13, 20, 38 and 44. ➢ Bicycle is used for various purposes like work, shopping etc. but majority of the population prefers to use it for educational purposes i.e. 36%. ➢

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TAZ WISE CAR OWNERSHIP ➢ As per the sample data, TAZ 23 has maximum number of car owners i.e. 76 as per the survey data. ➢ TAZ no. 21, 15 and 14 has also having large number of car owners. ➢ The predominant land use considering all these TAZs is Residential but also have other land uses like commercial, industrial, public-semi public etc. ➢ Because these TAZs are closer to the CBD area of Guntur, therefore most of the population prefers to use cycle for various purposes. TAZ wise average vehicle ownership 2 TAZ wise average 2W ownership 58 TAZ wise average CAR ownership 8 TAZ wise average CYCLE ownership 7 VEHICLE OWNERSHIP KRISHNASHASHANKGAUTAMI-2200600046-2200600051 49

➢ Lesser number of trips are made from the zones which are far from the CBD area to the center of the town.

➢ The red color lines showing the trips ranging between 1 – 1000 which are majority in number, consists mostly of the work trips.

➢ Trips from the other TAZs are concentrated to the CBD area of Guntur which consists of various land uses.

➢ Maximum trips i.e. 5001 - 13888 is made daily between 10-47,10-48, 17-51, 10-37, 10-17, 10-52, 7-13, 5-10, 8-10.

➢ TAZ 10 having mixed category of number of trips due to multiple land use factor i.e. residential, commercial, industrial and mixed.

➢ 3001 - 5000 trips are made daily between 9-10, 10-29, 12-52, 40-50, 40-52, 11-29, 10-43, 10-17, 10-22, 10-28, 1-8, 2-5, 2-19, 2-18, 1-25, 2-25.

➢ Trips ranging between 5001 – 13888 can be seen in the zones which consists of pub-semi public land use, residential, recreational, industrial and commercial.

➢ 1000 - 3000 trips are made daily between 1-6, 2-6, 30-43, 13-52, 43-53, 4-53, 21-27, 19-27, majority of trips of this category are originated from TAZ 2.

DESIRE LINE (TOTAL TRIPS) SHASHANK-2200600051 50

➢ Maximum percentage share is seen of 1-1000 trips category crossing through the core part of the city having the residential predominant land use followed by industrial, commercial, mixed resi-commercial and public semi public respectively.

The percentage share of 2W is maximum i.e. 36% followed by the IPT i.e. 31.3%.

➢ Heterogeneity of various modes can be seen in the core part of the city having the residential predominant land use followed by industrial, commercial, mixed resi-commercial and public semi public respectively.

➢

The PT trips can be seen more in CBD area of Guntur which has residential predominant land use followed by other land uses.

➢

➢ The percentage share of NMT is 9.78%.

➢ The TAZs with public semi-public, mixed residentialcommercial, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses account for the majority of public transportation and two-wheeler trips.

➢ The % share of NMT is 9.8% are and trips are made from the city's outskirts to the city's core, covering a distance of 5 to 11 kilometers. SHASHANK-2200600051

DESIRE LINE (MODE)

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N DESIRE LINE (MODE) MODE CATEGORY 1 to 3 NMT 4 to 5 IPT 6 to 7 2W 8 to 9 CAR 10 to 13 PT ➢ The mode 1-3 is NMT, 4-5 is IPT, 6-7 is 2W, 8-9 is CAR, 10-13 is PT respectively.

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N DESIRE LINE (PURPOSE) ➢ In the map shown above, the purpose 1 - WORK, 2 - EDUCATION, 3 - SHOPPING, 4 - OTHER PURPOSES TRIPS respectively. ➢ The TAZs with public semi-public, mixed residential-commercial, industrial, commercial, and residential land uses account for the work and education trips. ➢ The percentage share of work based trips is maximum i.e. 29.88% followed by shopping trips i.e. 25.68%. ➢ While educational and other purpose trips have 24.48% and 19.94% share. ➢ Education and work trips covers the core part of the city with multiple land uses. DESIRE LINE (PURPOSE) SHASHANK-2200600051 52

PUBLIC TRANSPORT AND CHARACTERISTICSIPT

City Transport profile Characteristics of PT & IPT Sr.no TransportMode Vehicle type CapacitySeating capacityFleet in no's AvgLengthRoute MajorareaServing 1 IPT Auto 3 seater 3 20000 3.5 kms City Area limits 2 IPT Auto 6 seater 6 330 17 kms Regional 3 IPT Pvt Bus 30 63 12 kms City Area limits 4 PT Standard Bus 40 438 25 kms Regional Mode Code Vehicle Type sample (%) 1 Auto 35% 2 Maxi cab 0% 3 2W 40% 4 2W Passenger 2% 5 Car, Van 1% 6 Car, Van Passenger 0% 7 Taxi 0% 8 Minibus 4% 9 Govt bus 18% 10 Pvt bus 100%0.2% Modal Share Existing PT-IPT Scenario

The local transport preferred by the commuters include, privately operated auto rickshaws, cabs, mini buses etc., and government run APSRTC buses in specified routes.

NTR bus station handles more than 2000 buses everyday, which arrive from different districts of the state. A new mini bus station built in the premises of NTR bus station is being used to run buses towards Vijayawada to ease the congestion in main bus station. Everyday, close to one lakh people travel by different modes of transport. Auto rickshaws operating on a sharing basis are the cheapest form of transport for the students and the working population.

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 54N Characteristics of IPT RouteIPTno From To Route LengthRouteinkms TimeTravelinmins JourneySpeed(Kmph) Fleet Size in Autos No of Trips per Auto Total Trips CapacitySeating Head way in mins OccupancyAvgRatio Rider ship in persons 1 NTR Bus stand Namburu Via Auto nagar & NH 16 13.00 25 31.20 60 10 600 6 1.5 0.95 3,420 2 NTR Bus stand Mangalagiri Via Auto nagar & NH-16 20.00 30 40.00 50 6 300 6 3.0 0.80 1,440 3 NTR Bus stand Tenali Via Narakoduru 23.00 50 27.60 30 10 300 6 2.5 0.80 1,440 4 GNT market Prathipadu Via Etukuru 19.00 35 32.57 40 10 400 6 2.0 0.75 1,800 5 GNT market Edlapadu Via Chowdavaram 28.00 50 33.60 20 5 100 6 10.0 0.75 450 6 Lodge Center Lam Via Gorantla 9.00 20 27.00 100 10 1000 6 1.0 0.95 5,700 7 Reliance Bunk Gorantla Via Guntur Inner Ring Road 4.00 15 16.00 30 20 600 6 1.0 0.65 2,340 Total 116 Avg-32.14 Avg-29.71 330 71 3300 Avg-6.00 Avg -3.00 Avg-0.81 16590 RouteIPTno From To Route LengthRouteinkms TimeTravelinmins JourneySpeed(Kmph) Fleet Size in Autos No of TripsAutoper TotalTrips CapacitSeatingy Head way in mins OccupanAvgcyRatio personsshipRiderin 8 NTR Bus stand Gujjanagundla circle Via Koritipadu 6.41 20 19.23 100 10 1000 3 5.0 0.85 2,550 9 NTR Bus stand Gujjanagundla circle Via Lakshmi Puram 6.81 25 16.34 150 10 1500 3 5.0 0.95 4,275 10 NTR Bus stand Guntur Railway Station Via Nazz Center 2.27 10 13.62 200 20 4000 3 2.0 0.80 9,600 11 NTR Bus stand Gaddipadu old NH 5 3.20 10 19.20 100 20 2000 3 5.0 0.85 5,100 12 NTR Bus stand Manipuram old NH 5 1.91 10 11.46 50 10 500 3 2.0 0.80 1,200 13 NTR Bus stand Old Guntur Via Balaji Nagar 1.89 15 7.56 50 20 1000 3 5.0 0.80 2,400 14 BR Stadium IDP Colony Via Gangi Bazar 2.19 15 8.76 50 20 1000 3 2.0 0.80 2,400 15 NTR Bus stand Naidupeta Via Donka Road 2.95 15 11.80 100 10 1000 3 5.0 0.80 2,400 16 Ramesh Hospital Pattabipuram Via Collector Office Road 3.45 20 10.35 200 10 2000 3 2.0 0.80 4,800 17 PVK Market AT Agraharam Via Nagarampalem 3.49 25 8.38 100 10 1000 3 10.0 0.80 2,400 18 PVK Market APHB colony Via Nagarampalem 4.77 20 14.31 200 10 2000 3 2.0 0.80 4,800 19 JKC College Swarnabharathi Nagar Via SVN colony 2.46 10 14.76 100 20 2000 3 2.0 0.80 4,800 Total 41.80 Avg-16.25 Avg-13 1400 170 19,000 Avg-3 Avg-3.9 Avg-0.82 46,725 ➢ Auto – 3 Seater ➢ Auto – 6 Seater PT & IPT Characteristics V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 57N Characteristics of PT Sr.no PvtRouteBus no From To LengthRoutein kms TimeTravelin mins JourneySpeed (Kmph) SizeFleetin Buses No of Trips per Bus TotalBus Trips CapacitSeating y wayHeadin mins OccupancyAvg ratio shipRiderin persons 1 2 Guntur Old Bus stand Kakani Temple 7.40 26 17.08 4 10 40 30 7.40 0.80 960 2 3 Guntur Old Bus Stand Gundavaram 22.00 70 18.86 1 5 5 30 22.00 0.90 135 3 5 Guntur Old Bus Stand Kanteru 13.70 36 22.83 3 10 30 30 13.70 0.75 675 4 6 Guntur Old Bus Stand Namburu 12.20 29 25.24 4 10 40 30 12.20 0.70 840 5 7 PVK Naidu Market Yanamadala 18.90 50 22.68 6 15 90 30 18.90 0.85 2,295 6 12 NTR Bus Station Yanamadala 18.10 45 24.13 2 6 12 30 18.10 0.80 288 7 13 PVK Naidu Market Kornepadu 10.20 30 20.40 4 10 40 30 10.20 0.85 1,020 8 15 NTR Bus Stand SVN Colony, via Koritipadu 7.20 34 12.71 24 20 480 30 7.20 0.65 9,300 9 23 NTR Bus Stand SVN pattabipuramColony,via 8.10 40 12.15 1 4 4 30 8.10 0.70 84 10 24 NTR Bus Stand Gorantla 7.50 30 15.00 2 10 20 30 7.50 0.85 510 11 27 NTR Bus Stand SVN Colony lakshmipuramviaroad 8.00 35 13.71 12 20 240 30 8.00 0.75 5,395 Total 133.30 Avg-39 Avg-19 63 120 1,001 Avg-30 12.12Avg- Avg-0.78 21,502 ➢ Private Bus Route Details Characteristics of PT- Private Buses V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 59N Characteristics of PT ➢ Govt Bus Route Details GovtBus Route no TransportPublic Route Operator Type of Fleet CapacitySeating (persons) lengthRoutein kms TravelAvg Time in mins JourneySpeed (Kmph) No of Trips Per day wayHead-in mins OccupancyAverage Ratio commutingDaily passengers 1 ijayawadaMangalagiri/VGuntur APSRTC floor/StandarLowdBuses 56 20 45 26.67 188 19 0.75 7,896 2 NandiveluguGuntur APSRTC Standard Bus 56 22 50 26.40 12 70 0.75 504 3 Guntur Tenali APSRTC Standard Bus 56 27 60 27.00 114 20 0.75 4,788 4 Guntur Prathipadu APSRTC Stanadard Bus 56 20 45 26.67 21 45 0.75 882 5 aChilakaluripetGuntur APSRTC StanadardBus 56 40 75 32.00 111 17 0.75 4,662 6 GunturPerecherla APSRTC Stanadard Bus 56 14 30 28.00 114 15 0.75 4,788 7 AmaravthiGuntur APSRTC Standard Bus 56 36 75 28.80 30 34 0.75 1,260 Total Avg-26 Avg -46 Avg-27.93 590 Avg31.43 Avg – 0.75 24,780 Characteristics of PT- Govt. Buses V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054

TERMINAL CHARACTERISTICS

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N 1.PARKING 2.TERNIMAL - 2 3.PARCELOFFICE 4.STAFF PARKING KEY PLAN 5.ADMINISTRATION LEGEND Administration Block Terminal BusOpenCirculationWorkshop2SpaceParking Parking WaterGreenerytank SCALE NOT TO SCALE OTHERPROPERTY OTHERPROPERTY Area distribution of bus station --- sq.m Administration Block 4951.10 Terminal 2 block 968.82 Workshop 1,976.67 Circulation 5632.31 Open Space 7774.10 Bus Parking 8,455.69 Parking 1,404.39 Greenery 11,368.13 bus station Year of establishment 1990 No. of entry and exits ( buses) 5 No. of entry and exits ( passengers) 2 No. of bus bays in ternimal 1 36 No. of bus bays in ternimal-2 10 1. 3.2.4. 5. Terminal 2 Unauthorized Car Parking Service roads Overhead water tank Zebra CirculationcrossingspaceBusbaysinternimal-1 EXISTING BUS TERMINAL SITE PLAN MANOJ.S - 2200600043 BUS TERMINAL 61

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N S.No area Exiting area in sq.m Standard as per Bus TerminalGuidelinesDesign Remarks 1. Administration Block 4951 -2. Terminal 2 block 968 Reservation60sq.mOffice3. Workshop 1,976 140sq.m/bay 123.33sq.m Deficit for 15 buses 4. Circulation 5632 15% of occupancyterminal Adequate 5. Open Space 7774 - NA 6. Bus Parking 8,455 262sq.m /bay Adequate 7. Parking in ECS 1,404 23sq.m/ECS 61 ECS SpacesAvailable 8. Greenery 11,368 - Adequate Total 42,528 -Source : Bus Terminal Design Guidelines By Sgarchitects Report & Site Secondary Data OBSERVATIONS EXISTING BUS TERMINAL BUS TERMINAL ❖ Survey out comes inadequate workshop area , absents of parking area for 4 wheeler and inadequate 2 wheeler , parking area for new buses. ❖ Need to be Proposed workshop area for required 15 buses , parking area for 4-wheeler and 2-wheeler along with FEC , parking area for new buses. MANOJ.S - 2200600043 62

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NTERMINAL ANALYSIS General Information Of Railway Station Year of establishment 1916 No. of entry points 2 (East & West) No. of platforms 7 No. of tracks 10 Average no. of passenger trains per week 77 Number of Halting Trains 99 Number of Originating Trains 34 Number of Terminating Trains 12 Passenger footfall/day 43000 Entrance 1 The main entrance located at Rail pet side is known as Guntur Government Hospital gate, and leads to platform 1.This entrance has been also named as terminal 1 and has gate numbers 1 to 7. Entrance 2 The entrance on rear side is also known as Arundalpet side and has been named as terminal 2. GUNTUR JUNCTION RAILWAY STATION The Guntur railway station is one of the busiest junctions connecting Chennai, Hyderabad, Bengaluru and the Rayalaseema region. Railway StationRoadPassengerstationflowVehicleflowPlatformOpenspaceSurroundingBuildingsBuildingInternalRoad Legends Foot over bridge Waiting hall Entrance Circulation Area Area calculation Total Area 105969.30 sqmt Platform Area 26589 sqmt • It Is situated at TAZ45. • TAZ45 includes ward no. 11. • Total population of TAZ45 is 4782 . • Total attractions in TAZ45 is 99913. SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 63

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 64N PT USER CHARACTERISTICS: Business 17% 25%Housewife3%Job Labour14% Student41% USER OCCUPATION 0-500047% 11000-1500011%2100016000-2000014%-250006%26000-300008%6000-1000011% More than 30000 3% USER INCOME Business8% Education28% Recreation22% Work42% TRIP PURPOSE 062%1.01.1 More15%2.0than 2 23% ACCESS DISTANCE TO PT Male78% Female22% GENDER DISTRIBUTION 2115-2029%2518%26-307%3111%35 36-403% 41-4518% Above 45 14% USER AGE DISTRIBUTION PT User CharacteristicsSLNO PARAMETER VALUE 01 AVERAGE TRIP DISTANCE 7.5 kms 02 AVERAGE JOURNEY TIME 15.6 mins 03 AVERAGE ACCESS DISTANCE 2.07 kms ANIMESH – 2200600037

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 65N PT OPERATOR CHARACTERISTICS: <3011%YEARS 30-4547%YEARS 45 6040%YEARS >602%YEARS PT OPERATOR AGE DISTRIBUTION Large67%Bus Mini33%Bus PT VEHICLE TYPE Upto 8 18%hours 8-10 hours 52% 10-1225%hours More than 12 hours 5% PT OPERATOR WORKING HOURS <1000012% 10000-1500047% 15000-2500027%250006%35000 >350008% PT OPERATOR MONTHY INCOME OWNED30% NOT OWNED 70% PT OPERATOR VEHICLE OWNERSHIP PT Operator Characteristics • Majority of the operators fall in the age group of 30 45 years. • Most of the vehicles that run regarding the public transportation are Large Buses. • Majority of the operators work for a time duration of 8 10 hours a day. • Most of the public transport vehicles are not owned by the operators. ANIMESH – 2200600037

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 66N IPT USER CHARACTERISTICS: 15-2018% 21-2512% 26-3015% 31-3517% 4136-4014%-4510%Above 45 14% USER AGE DISTRIBUTION Male59% Female41% GENDER DISTRIBUTION Business 22%Housewife11% 40%Job Labour 6% Student 21% USER OCCUPATION 0-5000 100006000-11000-15000 16000-20000 21000-2500026000-30000 Above 30000 USER INCOME 0-1.064% 1.1-2.0 12% thanMore2 24% ACCESS DISTANCE TO IPT Business15% RecreationEducation12%10% RetreatHometo10%WorkShopping22%31% TRIP PURPOSE IPT User CharacteristicsSLNO PARAMETER VALUE 01 AVERAGE TRIP DISTANCE 3.69 kms 02 AVERAGE JOURNEY TIME 8.7 mins ANIMESH – 2200600037

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 67N IPT OPERATOR CHARACTERISTICS: <3022%YEARS 30 YEARS4544% YEARS45-60 32% >602%YEARS IPT OPERATOR AGE DISTRIBUTION 3 Seaterauto48% 6 7 AutoSeater … RickshawsE5%Taxi 19% Van Like Tata11%Magic IPT VEHICLE TYPE Uptohours821% 8-10 hours 49% 10 hours1226% More than 12 hours4% IPT OPERATOR WORKING HOURS <1000021% 10000-1500055% 15000-2500015% 25000-35000 7% >350002% IPT OPEARTOR MONTHLY INCOME OWNED44% OWNEDNOT56% IPT OPERATOR VEHICLE OWNERSHIP IPT Operator Characteristics SL NO PARAMETER VALUE 01 AVERAGE NO. OF TRIP/DAY 23.5 02 AVERAGE OPERATING HOURS 11.2 hours 03 AVERAGE NO. OF PASSENEGERS/AUTO 04 04 AVERAGE DISTANCE COVERED/AUTO 5.87 kms ANIMESH – 2200600037

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 68N No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a No of Buses available in a city on any day No. 211 b Total Population of the city No. 1029813 c Availability of Public transport 1000 population Ratio 0.204 Los Range Observation 1 >=0.6 Availability of PT/1000 people is around 0.204 which comes under LOS 3. There is need for more buses. 2 0.4-0.6 3 0.2-0.4 4 <0.2 No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Total length in road kms of the corridors on which public transport systems ply in the city Km. 85.68 b Area of the urban limits of the city Sq. Km 139.138 c Service Coverage (a/b) Km./Sq. km 0.615 Extent of Supply / Availability of Public Transport System: Service Coverage of Public Transport in the City: Los Range Observation 1 >=1 The observed service coverage is 0.615 which comes under LOS 3. Which represents there is lack of public transport network in Guntur. 2 0.7 1.0 3 0.3-0.7 4 <0.3 Transit Access Area --(Percentage built up area within 500m of PT running) No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a PT corridor length (500m buffer on either side) Sq. Km. 62.48 b Total developed area Sq. Km. 139.138 c Transit access area = (a/b)*100 % 44.9 Los Range Observation 1 >=80 The transit access area is 44.9% of total area which comes under LOS 3. Which represents there is lack of public transport network in Guntur. 2 60 80 3 40-60 4 <40 LOS for Public Transport: SERVICE LEVEL BENCHMARKING( PT) MITRADEV – 2200600044

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 69N No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Avg. Waiting Time Minutes 48.16 Los Range Observation 1 <=4 The avg. waiting time is 48.16 mints. Which comes under LOS 4. There is need of more fleets to reduce the waiting time. 2 4 6 3 6 10 4 >10 No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Average trip length in the city. Km. 10.91 b Average trip cost Rs. 19.52 Minimum wage in the country Rs. 6000 c Total expenditure on transportation = ((fare /km)* Average trip length))*52 1015.04 d (TotalAffordabilityexpenditure on transportation/total Monthly income) *100 % 16.91 Affordability: Los Range Observation 1 <=10 The expenditure on travel is around 16.91% of monthly income which falls under LOS 3 which is respectively high. 2 11 14 3 14-20 4 >20 Average waiting time Transit Access Area --(Percentage built up area within 500m of PT running) MITRADEV – 2200600044SERVICE LEVEL BENCHMARKING( PT)

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 70N No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a No of IPT available in a city on any day No. 1730 b Total Population of the city No. 1029813 c Availability of IPT 1000 population Ratio 1.67 Los Range Observation 1 >=8 The no of IPT/1000 people coms out to be 1.67. It comes under LOS 4. So we need more IPTs in the city. 2 6-8 3 4 6 4 <=4 No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Total length in road kms of the corridors on which IPT systems runs in the city Km. 95.29 b Area of the urban limits of the city Sq. Km 139.138 c Service Coverage (a/b) Km./Sq. km 0.684 Extent of Supply / Availability of Public Transport System: Service Coverage of Public Transport in the City: Los Range Observation 1 >=1 The service coverage of IPT network is 0.684 which comes under LOS 3 which represents there is requirement of more IPT routes 2 0.7 1.0 3 0.3-0.7 4 <0.3 Avg. IPT Occupancy: No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Over loaded vehicle No. 5 b No of Observation No. 30 c Occupancy(a/b) % 16.67 Los Range Observation 1 0 Over loaded IPTs are 16% of total fleet. Which comes under LOS 2. So there is still more requirement of IPTs. 2 <20 3 20 50 4 >50 LOS for Intermediate Para Transport: SERVICE LEVEL BENCHMARKING( IPT) MITRADEV – 2200600044

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 71N No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Travel time by IPT Minutes 66 b Travel time by 2W Minutes 42 c Travel time ratio Ratio 1.57 Los Range Observation 1 >=20 The average travel speed is 25.44 kmph which comes under LOS 1. Speed is sufficient on roads. 2 18 20 3 16 18 4 <16 No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Average trip length in the city. Km. 8.95 b Average trip cost Rs. 11.85 Minimum wage in the country Rs. 5000 c Total expenditure on transportation = ((fare /km)* Average trip length))*52 616.2 d (TotalAffordabilityexpenditure on transportation/total Monthly income) *100 % 12.32 Travel Speed: Los Range Observation 1 <=1 Travel time ratio is 1.57 which comes under LOS 4.Which refers there are lots of delays.intermediate2 1.0 1.25 3 1.25 1.5 4 >1.5 Travel time ratio: No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Avg. Distance covered from Origin to destination Km. 8.95 b Avg. Travel time Minutes 24.50 c Travel speed Km/Hr 21.91 Affordability: Los Range Observation 1 <=10 For IPT users the it costs 12.32% of their income for travel expenditure. It comes under LOS 2. IPT is quite affordable in the city. 2 11-14 3 14 20 4 >20 SERVICE LEVEL BENCHMARKING( IPT) MITRADEV – 2200600044

ENVIRONMENT

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ENVIRONMENT ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS The major sources contributing to air pollution, particularly PM10 in Guntur city are • Road dust, • Vehicular emissions and construction activities. The reasons for higher values of PM10 could be attributed to re-suspension of • Road dust, • Emissions from vehicle movement, • Burning of biomass, • Municipal solid waste & garbage, • Construction activities, • Transportation of construction material such as sand, crusher metal, soil, congested roads, vehicle service centers, • Use of wood & coal for domestic & commercial cooking activities, etc. National clean air program. Guntur comes under India’s NCAP cities, I,e. National Clean Air programme cities in Vijayawada Airshed of Andhra Pradesh as per National Clean Air Programme (NCAP) of India. Image Source: MONITORING AMBIENT AIR QUALITY IN INDIAN CITY AIRSHEDS, SIM air Working Paper Series 40 2021 Guntur comes under five non-attainment cities of Andhra Pradesh identified by Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) in India as non-attainment for not meeting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). 1.Hot weather (summer) : March to May 2.South-west monsoon : June to September 3.North-east monsoon : October to December 4.Winter : December to February Sl. N o NAMP Station location 1 Municipal Travellers Bungalow, Guntur. 2 APPCB, Regional Office, Navabharatha nagar, Guntur. 3 Govt.General Hospital, Opp Railway station,Guntur. 4 APIIC Office Building, IDA, Auto Nagar,Guntur. Source: tabulated data from APPVCB real time air quality monitoring Source: Comprehensive action plan for non attainment cities for clean air, Guntur 72

ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS AIR QUALITY ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR

Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) These pollutants react with nitrogen oxides in the presence of sunlight to form ground level ozone and are emiited from cars, trucks and buses. Motor vehicles also emit pollutants, predominantly carbon dioxide, that contribute to global climate change. Transportation, which includes and airplanes, trains and ships accounts for around thirty percent of all heat trapping gas emissions.

MAJOR

Particulate matter (2.5 & 10) PM is a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air. Some particles, such as dust, dirt, soot, or smoke, are large or dark enough to be seen with the naked eye. Most PM particles form in the atmosphere as a result of chemical reactions between pollutants.

The largest anthropogenic source of CO is vehicle emissions.

Sulphur dioxide (SO2) Motor vehicles create this pollutant by burning sulfur containing fuels, especially diesel and coal. Sulfur dioxide can react in the atmosphere to form fine particles and, as other air pollutants

Air pollution emitted from transportation contributes to smog, and to poor air quality, which has negative impacts on the health and welfare of Thecitizens.transportation sector also contributes to emissions of air toxics, which are compounds that are known or suspected to cause cancer or other serious health and environmental effects. POLLUTANTS NO NO O3 CO CO2 PM 2.5 PM 10 SO2

Greenhouse gases

Guntur have 4 air quality monitoring stations which monitors the pollutants SO2, NO2, PM10 & PM 2.5. These only monitor the background pollution in the area and not the actual transport related emissions. K

Carbon monoxide

-2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

AIR QUALITY MONITORING STATIONS

Nitrogen oxide (No) These pollutants form ground level ozone and particulate matter.

policy

•

To develop eco friendly National Highways with participation of the community, farmers, NGOs, private sector, institutions, government agencies and the Forest Department for economic growth and development in sustainable manner. Land requirement

•

Green

Plantation species matrix

LITERATURE STUDY ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS 74 ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

•

using

•

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TITLE STUDY OBJECTIVE KEY POINTS/DATASET METHOD ADOPTED OUTCOME Air pollution and control, emission and air pollution dispersion techniques,modeling Dr. Bhola Ram Gurjar, IIT Roorkee • The objective is to impart the knowledge and understanding of causes and effects of air pollution and their controlling mechanisms • The study will provide a deeper understanding of air pollutants, pollution inventory and modelling • Also imparts knowledge on the impacts of air pollution on different aspects such as policy, human health and various contemporary technological innovation for betterment of air quality • Classification of models : emission inventory and dispersion models •

•

Two consecutive days in every month of 2011 have been chosen to calculate 8 hour average CO concentration at six receptor points. A road network extending from Ukkadam to Lali Road approximately 30 Km in length is considered in this study. The predicted CO concentration at the receptor points are then compared with the observed concentrations of CO. Root mean square error (RMSE) method is used to evaluate the model performance by comparing the predicted and observed CO concentration .

• Meteorological data • Emission Factors • TVC • Vehicle population • Road geometry •

• It has been inferred that CALINE4 model prediction is more accurate as it resembles the real scenario ideally and exhibits better correlation with measured values The study also shows a typical example pollutant contour around the study area, based on spatial data prediction. This approach of modelling thus would be helpful for air quality planning for the city of Coimbatore where spatial distribution of air quality is required to estimate Highways 2015 GOI, Ministry of road transport and highways The objective of the policy is to evolve a policy frame work for plantation along NH to reduce the impact of air pollution and dust.

•

Ambient Air Quality Modelling near busy Road Junctions in Coimbatore City using CALINE4 Model S. Muneeswaran1 , R. Chandrasekaran2 • To

•

The modeling software for analysis is chosen I,e. caline. model the dispersion pattern of vehicular carbon monoxide busy road junction Coimbatore city CALINE4 model.

Suitability and adaptation of modeling software's Working of dispersion model and dispersion modeling procedure.

near

•

Selection of suitable species along road side Plantation pattern Species selection criteria Plantation species matrix for species selection for road side plantation.giving ratings for plant species based on growth rate, ever greenness etc

Surface wind, wind speed, wind direction, insolation cloud cover Dispersion under time varying emergencyshortcondition,meteorologicalcontinuoustermreleasesundersituation

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 75N TYPES OF MODEL EMISSION MODEL METROLOGICAL MODEL CHEMICAL MODEL SOURCE DISPERSION RECEPTOR MODEL Model Type Input data needed Application Accuracy Remarks

Gives concentration estimates within an order of magnitude for continuous releases over homogeneous terrain Partly applicable for transportation if we treat vehicle as point source

ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS AIR POLLUTION MODELLING ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

Gives uniform concentration in domain, hence poor for point source near field Not applicable for transport related emission a it is useful more for area source modelplumeGaussian meteorologyCombined and diffusion model

Surface wind, wind speed, wind direction, insolation cloud cover Point, area, volume sources

Partly applicable for transportation if we treat vehicle as point source ctorymodels/trajeulerianLagrangian/emodel

Atmospheric stability, wind and turbulence, data from prognostic model Dispersion over complex terrain Good for complex terrain

Vertical average wind speed, volume of model domain, mixing height Area sources, distributed sources, long range trajectory modeling

Box model

Meteorological model

plume

Dispersion models

Better than plume models for time varying metrology but not satisfactory under strong wind shear

Puff model Dispersion models

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 76N DISPERSION MODELLING SOFTWARE CALINE 4 ❑ CALINE4 is a line source Gaussian based dispersion model developed by the California Department of Transportation for estimating air pollution levels within 500m of roadways. ❑ Predicts the concentrations of CO, NO, and PM₁0 and PM₂, near roadways. ❑ Extensively used model for predicting air quality along highways under prevailing traffic and meteorological conditions. Input Parameters: Literature survey Selection of model Data collection • concentrationBackgroundCollecting of pollutants • studyconditionsMeteorologicalofthearea • Source data : • Site description • Emission rate • topographicalLocal features emission load calculation Base year Data forecasting (TVC, REGISTRED ComparePOPULATION)VEHICLESHorizonyearwithNAAQSScenariosProposals& Stage - 1 Stage - 2 Stage - 3 Stage - 4 METHODOLOGY: ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS DISPERSION MODEL EMISSIONTRAFFICTRAFFIC PARAMETERSRECEPTORLOCATION METROLOGICALROADGEOMETRY TYPE TERRAINOF ⮚ TV hourly and peak. ⮚ Fuel type and quality. ⮚ Varies by vehicle categories and fuel type ⮚ Urban or rural ⮚ Flat or hilly ⮚ Road type ⮚ Road alignment ⮚ Mixing zone height ⮚ Wind speed ⮚ Wind direction ⮚ temperature ⮚ Stability class ⮚ Mixing height ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N SL NO PARAMETERS VALUES UNITS SOURCES 1 Traffic data (24 hrs) 24 hr on site video recording 2 weighted emission factors (WEF) g/mile 3 terrain type urban physical observation 4 road geometry a mixing zone (ROW+MEDIAN+3mwidth on both sides) 30+6=36 measured b road type at grade physical observation c road alignment straight google maps 5 meteorological data a wind speed m/s on site measurement or form online website b temperature *c c wind direction degrees wind rose diagram d mixing height m e stability class A,B,C,D,E,F, or G (P G) stability classes from CPCB 6 background concentrationsCO ppm or mg/m3 APPCB websites a background PM 2.5 concentrations ppm or mg/m4 APPCB websites b background PM 10 concentrations ppm or mg/m5 APPCB websites c background concentrationsNOx ppm or mg/m6 APPCB websites 7 monitored CO concentrations ppm or mg/m7A monitored PM concentrations2.5 ppm or mg/m8 b monitored PM 10 concentrations ppm or mg/m9 c monitored NOx concentrations ppm or mg/m10 STEP-1 STEP-2 STEP-4 STEP-3 STEP-5 STEP-6 OUTPUT ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS INPUT PARAMETERS: MODEL SIMULATION 77 ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N RECEPTOR LOCATIONS RECETORId X Y CO (PPM) (ug/m3)NO2 (ppm)PM2.5 (ppm)PM10 O1 431824.2 1803663 0.2 38 68 95.2 O2 429719.4 1797950 0.1 38 82.3 109.2 O3 438558.8 1801308 0.2 38 87.7 114.2 O4 437888.4 1797043 0.1 38 59.7 86.5 O5 439626.7 1809368 0.2 38 66.7 93.6 O6 440139.5 1806885 0.2 38 66.9 93.9 O7 439852.9 1802945 0.1 38 65.5 91.9 O8 440723.1 1801328 0.2 38 85.7 112.6 O9 444698.5 1805284 0.2 38 93.7 120.9 O10 443221.8 1798877 0.1 38 73.6 100.4 O11 446866.4 1795133 0 38 44 70.9 O12 444798.5 1802136 0.1 38 54.5 81.6 O13 435051.8 1802534 0.2 38 69.2 96.6 O14 433936.2 1799552 0.1 38 83.9 111.4 O15 439381.6 1799069 0.1 38 59.5 86 O16 441715.1 1801525 0.2 38 92.5 118.8 O17 443210.1 1803409 0.2 38 92.1 118.8 ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS 78 AIR POLLUTION MODELLING AQI RANGE PM 10 PM 2.5 NO2 SO2 CO O3 NAAQ 0 500 100 60 80 80 2.0 100 GOOD 0 50 0 50 0 30 0 40 0 40 0 1.0 0 50 YSATISFACTOR 51 100 51 100 31 60 41 80 41 80 1.1 2.0 51 100 MODERATE 101 200 101 250 61 90 81 180 81 380 2.1 10 101 168 POOR 201 300 251 350 91 120 181 280 381 800 10 17 169 208 VERY POOR 301 400 351 430 121 250 281 400 801 1600 17 34 209 748 SEVERE 401 500 430+ 250+ 400+ 1600+ 34+ 748+ Concentration breakpoints for each pollutants EMISSION CONCENTRATION AT RECEPTORS: ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS 79 DISPERSION MAPPING OF PM 2.5DISPERSION MAPPING OF PM 10 DISPERSION MAPPING OF COEXISTING LANDUSE MAP ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ➢ The maps show the relation between the emissions levels with landuse, road density and building foot print open space ratio. ➢ It can be observed that the pollution levels are higher in regions with commercial and public buildings. ➢ In addition to this, these locations also correspond to regions with a dense building foot print. ➢ Regions with smaller foot prints are seen to have lower co levels. ➢ The above values are related to the vehicular movement in these regions and also the road densities which is higher in these areas. Built up VegetationAgriculturearea& open spaces LEGEND OBSERVATION:ZONE WISE ROAD DENSITY MAP BUILT UP VS GREEN SPACE MAP BASE YEAR AQI MAP ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS 80 ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N BASE YEAR MODELLED EMISSION COMAPRISON WITH APPCB STANDARDS The AQI is calculated for five major air pollutants: ⮚ Ground level ozone ⮚ Particle pollution/(PM2.5/pm 10) ⮚ Carbon Monoxide ⮚ Sulphur dioxide ⮚ Nitrogen dioxide AQI for each receptors were calculated separately and average AQI was considered for the city level analysis. AV. AQI = 140.5AQI for past one week collected from AQI dashboard. ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS 81 AQI ESTIMATION ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Emission Load Calculation for the Base Year Emission Load Calculation (Vehicle Kilometers Travelled Method) ❑ Total Population (Source Projected Population of 2021) ❑ Per Capita Trip Rate (Source Household Survey) ❑ Modal Split(Source Results from fuzzy logic, Data Household Survey) ❑ Occupancy (Source OD Survey) ❑ Emission Standards (Source NAAQ) INPUTS: TOTAL POPULATION (A) 1029836 PER CAPITA TRIP RATE (B) 0.86 Total Person Trips (AXB) 8,85,658.96 Vehicular Trips Modes 2W CAR AUTO BUS Share [C] 37.8 0.5 41.9 19.8 Occupancy [D] 1.39 3.23 4.68 32.21 Modal trips/ Vehicular trips [AB*C/D] 200318.74 1140.28 65949.69 4528.16 Mode wise Av. Trip Length (km) [E] 10.52 21.09 14.46 30.64 VEHICLE KM TRAVELLED 2107353.14 24048.54 953632.50 138741.95 2W CAR AUTO BUS Emission Factors (g/km) Standards from NAAQS CO2 26.62 223.6 60.3 515.2 PM 0.05 0.03 0.2 0.56 NOX 0.19 0.2 1.28 12 HC 1.42 0.25 0.14 0.18 CO 2.2 1.98 5.1 3.6 Pollution Load from Vehicles [ (VKT* Emission Factor)/1000000)] CO2 (Tonnes/day) 56.10 5.38 57.50 71.48 PM(Tonnes/day) 0.11 0.001 0.19 0.08 NOX (Tonnes/day) 0.40 0.005 1.22 1.66 HC (Tonnes/day) 2.99 0.01 0.13 0.12 CO (Tonnes/day) 4.64 0.05 4.86 0.50 Pollution Load from Vehicles (Tonnes/ Year) CO2 (Tonnes/year) 20475.68 1962.70 20988.97 26090.15 PM (Tonnes/year) 38.46 0.26 69.62 28.36 NOX (Tonnes/year) 146.14 1.76 445.54 607.69 HC (Tonnes/year) 1092.24 2.19 48.73 44.06 CO (Tonnes/year) 1692.20 17.38 1775.19 182.31 OBSERVATION: ➢ From the analysis it can be observed that maximum emission load is produced by Bus followed by auto and 2 W. ➢ It is important to reduce the use of private vehicles (two wheeler) along with promoting use of e auto E bus as these are the major pollutants. 0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 CO2 (tonnes/day) PM (tonnes/day) NOX (tonnes/day) HC (tonnes/day) CO (tonnes/day) EMISSION LOAD - VEHICLE TYPE 2W CAR AUTO BUS ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS 82 ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

ROAD SAFETY

ROAD SAFETY OVERVIEW ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

•

SOLUTIONS MoRTH stated that 50 percent of the road accidents in India are due to road engineering problems. Recommends the need for an engineering-driven approach to reduce road traffic injuries in India. Allocation of 14,000 cr funds to the states to remove the blackspots by 2030,under proposed World bank scheme. The rectification of black spots is done using short-term remedies such as installing cautionary road signs and markings, transverse bar markings, rumble strips and solar blinkers, etc, as well as long-term remedies such as providing flyover, underpasses, foot over bridges, service roads, etc, wherever required. These improvements are suggested for NH & Expressways only. Firstpost, MoRTH- 2019

Source:

•

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 83N • Over 1.51 lakh people died due to injuries caused by road accidents in India, which is more than deaths caused by the diseases malaria(7,700), HIV(58,960), TB(79,144) in 2019. • India reported a total of 4,49,002 accidents in the year 2019. These accidents led to 1,51,113 accidental deaths and 4,51,361 accidental injuries. 30% 70% accidents in India NH& otherExpresswaysroads

•

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 84N 40003000200010000 5000 70006000 8000 100009000 led to non injury fatal led to minor injury grievous Accidents severity severity40% 20% 18% 12% 5%5% Reasons of accidents over technicalsignageslackdrivingnegligencedrunkspeed&drivesansrestofproperissues An article showing a report on “Delivering Road Safety in India” at “ Third Global Ministerial Conference on Road Safety” in Stockholm. ACCIDENTS TREND – ANDHRA PRADESH • Andhra Pradesh stood eighth in the number of road accidents reported across the country in 2019, according to data released by the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways. • MoRTH- 2019 report stated that the state reported 21,992 accidents in which 7,984 persons were killed • Stood seventh in the number of deaths in the accidents. • over 35 per cent of the total accidents were reported on NH, 2,760 mishaps were fatal. • The cause of accidents in AP are due to over speeding followed by other factors as shown. • On an average, 36.3 persons were killed in every 100 accidents, according to the Ministry’s observation on the severity of road accidents. • Owing to improving road safety conditions the Transport Department of AP has identified 150 blackspots. • 124 blackspots are identified in the Vijayawada region. ROAD SAFETY Source: MoRTH 2019. ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

• The project costs ₹258 crore and is being supported by the World Bank.

• Developed by the Indian Institute of Technology-Madras (IIT-M) and will be implemented by the National Informatics Centre.

ROAD

• Web-based Information Technology (IT) solution will facilitate road accident data collection by 4 stakeholder departments i.e., Police, Transport, Highways & Health Departments.

•

An initiative of the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH), Govt. of India with objective to improve road safety in the country in 2020.

LITERATURE ABHIJIT

• The first pilot project include six States with highest fatalities from road crashes — Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu and Uttar Pradesh

• Enables to visit, examine, and feed necessary details. Live location updates can be made. Training of personnel is under process SAFETY SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 85N ROAD SAFETY ASSESSMENT PROGRAMMES IN INDIA iRAD (integrated Road Accident Database)iRAP (International Road Assessment Programme) • Developed under Sustainable Development Goals under UNO. • A registered charity dedicated to save lives by eliminating high risk roads throughout the world. • iRAP works in partnership with governments, road authorities, mobility clubs, development banks, NGOs and research organizations. • iRAP programmes and projects have been undertaken by partners in more than 100 countries worldwide. • Road safety is assessed through the Star Rating results through the risk factors obtained by assessing the road user characteristics • Uses the existing information and real time updation from accident location is not possible. • Develops framework and Safer Road Investment Plans (SRIP) that improve a road's Star Ratings to save lives.` • Assessed 21,000 kms roads in India.

•

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 86N iRAP STAR RATING METHODOLOGY Identification of risk prone zones Data of number of Accidents took place in 3 consecutive years Assessment of 100m road lengths of the black spots along the road Assigning risk factors for various road attributes Star ratings scores calculations ROAD ATTRIBUTES IN iRAP 1. Centreline Rumble Strips 2. Curvature 3. Delineation 4. Facilities for Bicycles 5. Facilities for Motorcycles 6. Grade 7. Intersection Channelization 8. Intersection Quality 9. Intersection Type 10. Lane Width 11. Number of Lanes 12. Median Type 13. Operating and Mean Speeds 14. Paved Shoulder Width 15. Pedestrian Crossing Facilities 16. Pedestrian Crossing Quality 17. Pedestrian Fencing 18. Property Access Points 19. Quality of Curve 20. Road Condition 21. Roadside Severity – Object 22. Roadside Severity Distance 23. School Zone Warning 24. Service Road 25. Shoulder Rumble Strips 26. Sidewalk Provision 27. Sight Distance Restriction 28. Skid Resistance / Grip 29. Speed Management/ Traffic Calming 30. Street Lighting 31. Vehicle Parking 32. External Flow and Median Traversability RISK FACTORS • Risk factor indicates the likeliness of crash to occur. • The risks are vehicle- vehicle collision, vehicle- bicyclist/ pedestrian collisions. • Classified based on road attribute category, road user type and crash type. Road user type • Vehicle occupants • Motorcyclists • Bicyclists • pedestrians Crash type • Crash type (likelihood & severity) • Head on crash (LOC & overtaking) • Run off • Alongside passenger • Along driver side crash • Bicyclist crash (along & crossing) ROAD SAFETY iRAP ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 87N ROAD ATTRIBUTES & RISK FACTORS • crash modification factors (CMF), are used in the iRAP Star Rating methodology to relate road attributes and crash rates • CMF is a multiplicative factor used to compute the expected number of crashes occurred at a particular site. • 38 CMF/ risk factors are considered for detailed analysis of SRS. • Risk factors vary in severity of crash, as in head on crash or rear end crashes. STAR RATING BANDS • Star Ratings indicate the level of safety offered by road infrastructure to its users. • 5 star rating represents high level of safety where as 1 star represents the lowest level of safety. • The desirable target set by iRAP is 3 stars. • SRS = Σ Crash Type Scores • Crash Type Scores = Likelihood x Severity x Operating speed x External flow influence x Median traversability ROAD SAFETY DATADATACOLLECTIONANALYSISOUTCOMES Surveys, road attributes data, crash data Coding, star rating scores Road condition, levels of risk, safety Safer investmentroadplan PROPOSALS FOR HORIZON YEAR BLACKSPOT IDENTIFICATION • short stretch of road Of about 500 m length. • Where Five accidents involving serious injuries/fatalities or Ten fatalities took place during the past 3 calendar years • Some times single accident can have multiple fatalities. Hence number of fatal/ grievous accidents at the same location is better indicator of problematic road / road environment (i.e., Black spot) than the number of fatalities. • Surveying & mapping the road stretch besides making the audit objective • Assigning unique ID numbers to identified blackspots • Preparation of comprehensive road accident database. (Source: Implementation of Road Safety Engineering Improvements, MoRTH 2017) METHODOLOGY ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 88NROAD SAFETY ROAD ATTRIBUTES Delineators Road markings Informatory signs Separate lanes Table top crossings Safety barriers • Helps in avoiding the severity of crash due to head-on and along side collision. • Rumble strips alerts the drivers from crossing the lanes. • Footpaths reduces the risk from run off and along side impacts. • iRAP states that the risk can be mitigated by 20- 25%. • Annual maintenance of these road safety treatments can be effective to 20 45% in minimizing the impacts of crash Warning signs • Informatory/ warning signs are effective to 20- 25%. • Annual maintenance can be effective to 20 45% in minimizing the impacts of crash. • Maintenance in 5 year intervals. • Separate lanes for motorcycles/ bicycles can be effective to 90% to avoid along side crash severity. • Table top crossings are 30-40% more safer than the zebra crossings. • Maintenance for every 5 years Rumble strips ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 89N ACCIDENTS DATA 866 857 803 545 3002001000 400 1000900800700600500 2017 2018 2019 2020 accidents accidents Trend of fatal and non- fatal accidents at Guntur urban limits. (Source: The Hindu) 32 49 236050403020100 2014 2015 2016 FATAL ACCIDENTS Fatal accidents Trend of fatal in Guntur city. The data of 2016 is upto the month of April, 2016 (Source: Guntur Traffic Police department) 284 227 78500 100 300250200150 2014 2015 2016 Non- Fatal accidents Non- fatal accidents Trend of Non fatal in Guntur city. The data of 2016 is upto the month of April, 2016 (Source: Guntur Traffic Police department) S.No MAJOR IDENTIFIED ACCIDENT PRONE AREAS IDENTIFIED NO OF BLACK SPOTS IN THE CITY 1 Ktukuru 23 2 Women’s College 3 Kakani road 4 Amravati road 5 I.L.T.D road 6 Laxmipuram road ROAD SAFETY GUNTUR STATISTICS ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

• The traffic police department is proposed to post additional 25 single beats and 40 double beats.

• 24 Black spots/stretches were identified on the 6 State High ways running through the District.

• The road geometry is uneven.

• Most of the blackspots in the city are intersections with ≥ 3 roads.

• Absence of RoBs in the 55 and 56th divisions.

• Increase in vehicular traffic and inadequate road infrastructure.

• No junction signals, potholes, damaged drains.

• The man power required for monitoring the activities in the city is deficient.

• The deficient strength in the city is 243 personnel.

• The city has existing beats of 40 Single beats and 20 Double beats

• Absence of footpaths and paved parking facilities.

ROAD SAFETY GUNTUR CITY ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

(Source: Guntur Traffic Police department)

• The required strength mentioned for effectiveness as mentioned are 364 personnel.

67 number of Black spots/stretches are identified in Guntur Urban District.

• Delay in widening of roads.

• Absence of protected turn lane for the merging traffic at intersections.

•

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 91NROAD SAFETY ANALYSIS STAR RATING MAP OF SELECTED ROAD SEGMENTS STAR RATING SCORES (SRS) FOR ROAD SAFETY • Calculated for each 100 meter segment of road • Star Ratings are produced for four different road user groups, if present on the assessed road network, (i) vehicle occupant, (ii) motorcyclist, (iii) pedestrian and (iv) bicyclist. •

Star Ratings involve an inspection of road infrastructure attributes that are known to have an impact on the likelihood of a crash and its severity. The iRAP assessments make use of road attribute data for more than 50 variables at 100 metre intervals along a road. The limitations of data are reasons for variation to SRS.

•

ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 92NROAD SAFETY SRS ANALYSIS Laxmipuram road 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 VEHICLE OCCUPANT MOTOR CYCLIST BICYCLIST PEDESTRIAN 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 AMARAVATHI ROAD GT LAXMIPURAMROADROAD SRS Base year SRS 2026 SRS for 3 stars ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045

PARKING CHARACTERISTICS

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NPARKING ANALYSIS MAP INDICATING ON-STREET PARKING SURVEY LOCATIONS POINT ON LOCATIONSTREET TIME FARE 1 GUNTAROADGROUNDS 11:00 AM 6:00 PM Free 2 MUPPIRISTREETVARI 11:00 AM 6:00 PM Free 3 3 RD BRODIPETLANE 11:00 AM 6:00 PM Free 4 CLOTH BAZAAR 11:00 AM 6:00 PM Free 5 BRODIPET(STRETCH4THLANE1) 11:00 AM 6:00 PM Free 6 BRODIPET(STRETCH4THLANE2) 11:00 AM 6:00 PM Free 7 LALAPET ETUKURU 10:00 AM 6:00 PM Free 8 LALAPET STATIONPOLICEROAD 10:00 AM – 6:00 PM Free PARKING CHARACTERISTICS • To assess the existing parking characteristics in terms of parking duration and accumulation by mode. • Identifying the issues by estimating gap between the parking demand and supply. • Application of smart tools for sustainable parking and safe pedestrian movement. ON-STREET PARKING SURVEY LOCATIONS OBJECTIVES Legend Landuse_parcel LANDUSE RECREATIONALPUBLICMIXEDINDUSTRIALCOMMERCIALAGRICULTURALRESICOMMERCIALSEMIPUBLICRESIDENTIALTRANSPORT3 5 6 2 1 7 8 4 TAZ LU Entropy 29 0.55 40 0.48 42 0.49 43 0.53 Crowding due to improper pedestrian infrastructure Informal parking leading to congestion on roads No pedestrian crossing leading to conflicts, risks and delays SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 93

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NPARKING ANALYSIS The accumulation of vehicles is high in afternoon period from 14:00 to 14:15. The capacity of whole stretch is approximately 440 veh /hrs. LOCATION 1 LOCATION 2 PARKING DURATION FOR 2W PARKING DURATION FOR 2W 75% 12%5%8% >2hrs130min-<30min1hrhr-2hrs 78% 11%7%4%>2hrs130min-<30min1hrhr-2hrs The accumulation of vehicles is high in afternoon period from 14:00 to 14:15 The capacity of whole stretch is approximately 440 veh /hrs. 351 57 22 40 6 2 1 013 4 2 44003002001000 <30min 30min-1hr 1 hr-2 hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION 2W 3W 4W Others 705 101 59 3729 4 1 0 49 9 3 45004003002001000 600 800700 <30min 30min-1hr 1 hr-2 hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION 2W 3W 4W Others (GUNTA GROUNDS ROAD) (MUPPIRI VARI STREET) PARKING SURVEY ANALYSIS Parking area 300 Sqm Avg. Parking size 18 Sqm Parking bays available 16.67 Parking load 163.3 ECS hr Parking area 240 Sqm Avg. Parking size 18 Sqm Parking bays available 13.33 Parking load 136.65 ECS hr Parking volume 546.6 ECS Avg. Parking duration 57.6 Minutes Parking turnover 5.06 ECS/hr/bay Parking Index 26.48% 302520151050 11:00-11:15 11:15-11:30 11:30-11:45 11:45-12:00 12:00-12:15 12:15-12:30 12:30-12:45 12:45-13:00 13:00-13:15 13:15-13:30 13:30-13:45 13:45-14:00 14:00-14:15 14:15-14:30 14:30-14:45 14:45-15:00 15:00-15:15 15:15-15:30 15:30-15:45 15:45-16:00 16:00-16:15 16:15-16:30 16:30-16:45 16:45-17:00 17:00-17:15 17:15-17:30 17:30-17:45 17:45-18:00 ACCUMULATION CURVE Parking volume 653.2 ECS Avg. Parking duration 44.28 Minutes Parking turnover 6.05 ECS/hr/bay Parking Index 31.65% TIME ECSTotal 2520151050 30

11:00-11:15 11:15-11:30 11:30-11:45 11:45-12:00 12:00-12:15 12:15-12:30 12:30-12:45 12:45-13:00 13:00-13:15 13:15-13:30 13:30-13:45 13:45-14:00 14:00-14:15 14:15-14:30 14:30-14:45 14:45-15:00 15:00-15:15 15:15-15:30 15:30-15:45 15:45-16:00 16:00-16:15 16:15-16:30 16:30-16:45 16:45-17:00 17:00-17:15 17:15-17:30 17:30-17:45 17:45-18:00

ACCUMULATION CURVE TIME ECSTotal SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 94

ACCUMULATION CURVE ECSTotal TIME Parking area 240 Sqm Avg. Parking size 18 Sqm Parking bays available 13.33 Parking load 146.28 ECS hr Parking volume 558.1 ECS Avg. Parking duration 22 Minutes Parking turnover 5.42 ECS/hr/bay Parking Index 26.8% 302520151050

ACCUMULATION CURVE TIME ECSTotal SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 95

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NPARKING ANALYSIS • On parkingstreetis of 60m LOCATION 3 LOCATION 4 64%16%9%11% >2hrs130min-<30min1hrhr-2hrs 52%23%10%15%130min-<30min1hrhr-2hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION FOR 2W 222 54 31 42 6 0 0 0 15 1 0 00 0 0 99250200150100500 <30min 30min-1hr 1 hr-2 hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION 2W 3W 4W Others PARKING DURATION FOR 2W 130 58 24 2114 2 0 02 1 0 0140120100806040200 <30min 30min-1hr 1 hr-2 hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION 2W 3W 4W Others • On parkingstreetis of 60m (3 RD LANE BRODIPET) (CLOTH BAZAAR) Parking area 240 Sqm Avg. Parking size 18 Sqm Parking bays available 13.33 Parking load 159.75 ECS hr Parking volume 639 ECS Avg. Parking duration 55 Minutes Parking turnover 5.92 ECS/hr/bay Parking Index 30.96% 14121086420

ACCUMULATION CURVE ECSTotal TIME SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 96

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NPARKING ANALYSIS • The stretch is core populationnowhichcomplexcommercialareahavehigh.offloating. • incommercialBusiestplaceGuntur. LOCATION 5 LOCATION 6 86% 8%2% 4% >2hrs130min-<30min1hrhr-2hrs 82% 8%4%6%130min-<30min1hrhr-2hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION FOR 2W PARKING DURATION FOR 2W • The stretch is core complexcommercial area which have high no. of floating population. Busiest commercial place in Guntur. 558 52 10 27 91 20 5 15004003002001000 600 <30min 30min-1hr 1 hr-2 hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION 2W 3W 4W Others 284 29 13 5 61 6 4 2 26 4 1 3300250200150100500 <30min 30min-1hr 1 hr-2 hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION 2W 3W 4W Others (BRODIPET 4THLANE) (BRODIPET 4THLANE) Parking area 240 Sqm Avg. Parking size 18 Sqm Parking bays available 13.33 Parking load 114.8 ECS-hr Parking volume 459.2 ECS Avg. Parking duration 9.78 Minutes Parking turnover 4.26 ECS/hr/bay Parking Index 22.25% Parking area 180 Sqm Avg. Parking size 18 Sqm Parking bays available 10 Parking load 81.58 ECS-hr Parking volume 326.31 ECS Avg. Parking duration 10.26 Minutes Parking turnover 3.02 ECS/hr/bay Parking Index 15.81% 2520151050

ACCUMULATION CURVE ECSTotal TIME 14121086420

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NPARKING ANALYSIS The accumulation of vehicles is high in morning and evening period from 17:30 to On18:30.street parking is of 75m. LOCATION 7 LOCATION 8 86% 8%2% 4% >2hrs130min-<30min1hrhr-2hrs 82% 8%4%6%130min-<30min1hrhr-2hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION FOR 2W PARKING DURATION FOR 2W The accumulation of vehicles is high in morning and evening period from 17:30 to On18:30.street parking is of 50m.. 2 14 12 38 1 1 0 5 0 3 1 62520151050 30 4035 <30min 30min-1hr 1 hr-2 hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION 2W 3W 4W Others 204 60 17 60250200150100500 <30min 30min-1hr 1 hr-2 hrs >2hrs PARKING DURATION 2W 3W 4W Others (LALAPET ETUKURU) (LALAPET POLICE STATION ROAD) Parking area 300 Sqm Avg. Parking size 18 Sqm Parking bays available 16.67 Parking load 172.58 ECS-hr Parking volume 690.3 ECS Avg. Parking duration 40 Minutes Parking turnover 6.39 ECS/hr/bay Parking Index 33.44% Parking area 200 Sqm Avg. Parking size 18 Sqm Parking bays available 11.11 Parking load 59.45 ECS hr Parking volume 237.8 ECS Avg. Parking duration 52.52 Minutes Parking turnover 2.20 ECS/hr/bay Parking Index 11.52% 302520151050

ACCUMULATION CURVE ECSTotal TIME SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 97

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TAZ No. of HouseholSampled Average ExpenditureOnTransport 2W Car Cycle Average2W/HH AverageCar/HH Cycle/HHAverage SampleTotalECS EstimatedTotalHH EstimatedTotalECS ResidentialTotalArea ECS/100sqmt 3 3 567 2 0 0 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.13 2904 387.20 168007.23 0.23 4 4 650 0 1 0 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.25 2270 567.50 100871.45 0.56 5 3 367 2 0 0 0.67 0.00 0.00 0.13 6236 831.47 538881.71 0.15 16 26 1242 38 7 0 1.46 0.27 0.00 0.56 5265 2956.50 221474.13 1.33 19 144 688 110 1 30 0.76 0.01 0.21 0.18 5573 1006.24 288759.34 0.35 20 26 611 2 22 0 0.08 0.85 0.00 0.86 2674 2303.75 112065.72 2.06 41 42 437 46 0 12 1.10 0.00 0.29 0.25 1466 362.89 81099.65 0.45 AVERAGE 0.93 0.12 0.09 0.32 0.76 PARKING DEMAND IN RESIDENTIAL AREA PARKING ANALYSIS Inference: • The parking demand in TAZ20 is high , & TAZ5 is low as compared to other TAZ. • The average ECS/100sqm is 0.76. By Guntur Base Residential Built Up Area (Sq. Mt) No. householdof in each TAZ expenditureAverageoftransportNo.of2w, car, cycle Average 2w per HH = no. of 2w/no. of sampleHH Total 0.2*2W+1*Car+ECSsample=0.1*cycle TotalestimatedECS=estimatedTotalHH *Total sample ECS Total estimated HH Total Residentialarea Demand for Residential parking ECS/100sq mt = (total estimated ECS / Total residential area)*100 METHODOLOGYRESIDENTIAL AREA PARKING DEMAND ECS/100sqmt SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 98

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NPARKING ANALYSIS CALCULATING COMMERCIAL PARKING DEMAND METHODOLOGY • Attraction Rate For Commercial Is 0.78. • ECS Value For 2w And 4w Are 0.25 And 1 Respectively. Parking Demand For Attraction ECS Hours = Total Attraction ECS *Max. Parking Hours (10hrs) By Guntur Base Commercial Built Up Area (Sq. Mt) For Total Attraction Total No. Of Attraction = c. Built Up Area * Avg. Attraction Rate For Commercial(0.78) Avg. 2w ECS/Total Attraction = (Mode Share 2W/Survey Sample No. Of Attraction)*ECS Value Of Mode Share 2W Avg. ECS Of All Mode Share/ Attraction = avg. 2W ECS/ Attraction +avg. 4W ECS/ Attraction Total Attraction ECS = Avg. ECS Of All Mode Share/ Attraction * Total No. Attraction Bay Requirement For Attraction In ECS = Parking Demands For Attraction ECS Hours / Max. Parking Hours(10 hrs) Bays Supplied For Attractions ECS = Open Space In Each Zone / 24 Parking Supply Gap (ECS) = Total Parking Demand (ECS) –Total Parking Supply (ECS) Demand For Commercial ECS/100 sqmt = (Total Parking Demand ECS*100)/ C. Built Up Area TAZ Built (sq.mt)up AttractionTotal Avg ECS/Attracti2Wons Avg ECS/Attracti4Wons ECS/AttractiAvgons AttractionsTotalECS DemandParkingforAttractionsECShours forRequirementBayAttractionsinECS AttractionSuppliedBaysfors(ECS) SupplyParkingGap(ECS) DemandforC.ECS/100sqmt 29 39552 30850 0.04 0.00 0.04 1394.8 13947.7 1394.8 687.5 707.3 3.5 40 27568 21503 0.03 0.01 0.04 860.1 8601.2 860.1 356 504.1 3.1 42 26024 20299 0.04 0.00 0.04 917.7 9177.2 917.7 253.7 664 3.5 43 50134 39105 0.02 0.00 0.05 909.1 9090.6 909.1 575 334.1 1.8 CALCULATION SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 99

NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORT CHARACTERISTICS

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Locations Rtc Complex To Rs Brothers Center Via Jinnah Tower Guntur SECONDARY SURVEY Plan Showing Pedestrian Survey Locations Location hour(m)Peak peak pedestriahrnvolume hour(e)Peak peak pedestrianhrvolume T.B. Banglow to Hindu College 10.0011.00 419 05.0006.00 461 T.B. Building to Petrol Pump 10.0011.00 1000 05.0006.00 621 GMC Road Side 11.0012.00 264 05.0006.00 454 GMC to Gandhi Park 11.0012.00 297 06.0007.00 394 RTC to Jinna Tower 10.0011.00 508 07.0008.00 838 Jinna Tower to RTC 11.0012.00 501 07.0008.00 622 Jinna Tower Road Side 10.00 11.00 300 06.00 07.00 394 RTC Complex to Sarerar lodge 10.0011.00 577 04.0005.00 613 RTC Complex to Shop Side 09.00 10.00 345 05.00 06.00 491 RTC Road Side 10.0011.00 594 07.0008.00 1095 Ring Road East to West 11.0012.00 211 06.0007.00 325 S.No Survey Location SurveyDate Time ConfigurationRoad PedestriansMaleinnos PedestriansFemaleinnos PedestrainsTotalInNos Left hand sideinVehiclesNos(LHS)VehiclesRighthandsideinNos(LHS) Total No Vehiclesof Pvsquare (Pedestrians=*Vehicles*Vehicles) Observed Site PV square Value ExisringFacility HCM Warrant Conditions for 4Lane(Two )way ObservedWarrantcondition PedestrianRecommendedFacility 1 Location 1 ComplexAPSRTCEntry 10:009:00AMAM 4Laneway)(Two 1634 1090 2724 2732 2472 5204 2 Location 2 APSRTC Complex Exit 9:00AM 10:00 AM 4Lane (Two way) 787 525 1312 2984 3408 6392 3 Total (Loction 1 & 2) 4036 5716 5880 11596 5.4271E+11 5.42X10^11 zebraonlycrossing Warrant 1 : No Facility PV2 Value ( <2.5*10^8) ConditionWarrant4:GradeSeperatedPedestrianFacility There is aseeperatedRequirmentImmediateanofGradePedestrianfacilitieslikeFootoverBridge(FOB)ismandatorytoforthepeedestriansafetymeasures.Warrant 2 : Zebra Crossing PV2 Value (2.5 X 10^9 2.05 X 10^10) Warrant 3 : Pedestrian Signals PV2 Value (2.05 X 10^10 1.6 X 10^11) Warrant-4 : Grade Seperated - PV2 Value (>1.6 X 10^11) 4 Location 3 rs brothers center 10:30 AM 11:00 AM 4Lane (Two way) 1196 798 1994 4168 3584 7752 1.19826E+11 1.2*10^11 zebra crossing only zebra crossing / signal controlled LOCATION 1 LOCATION 2 LOCATION 3 PRIMARY SURVEY 1 2 3 Location 1 - Rtc Complex LocationEntrance 2 - Rtc Complex Exit Location 3 Rs Brothers Center PV SQUARE ANALYSIS Sources : ctts guntur PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES MANOJ.S - 2200600043 100

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N S.No Colour Code Road Hierarchy Length ( KM ) Width ( M ) 1. ARTERIAL ROAD 312.84 >25 2. SUB ARTERIAL ROAD 306.03 20 25 3. collector street 309.45 15 20 Total Road Network 928.32 FOOTPATH - SURVEY SITE OBSERVED ISSUES On-street parking wide10mwayCarriage 2mdividerwide wide10mwayCarriageencroachmentfootpathof Lack of unconditionalfootpathfootpath encroachment of unconditionalLackfootpathoffootpath footpath Encroachment Electricity Infrastructure COLLECTOR STREET Overall Road length KM Road width 18 M NO. of lane 4 lane 2 way footpath encroachment of footpathunconditionalLackfootpathoffootpath6mwayCarriagewide2mdividerwide6mwayCarriagewide encroachmentfootpathof Lack of unconditionalfootpathfootpath ARTERIAL ROAD Overall Road length KM Road width 26 M NO. of lane 6 lane 2 way footpath SUBARTERIAL ROAD Overall Road length KM Road width 22 M NO. of lane 4 lane 2 way encroachmentfootpathof Lack of unconditionalfootpath footpath 8mwayCarriagewide 2mdividerwide Carriage way 8m wide encroachment of footpathunconditionalLackfootpathoffootpath MODE CHOICE - PRIMARY SURVEYINFERENCE EXISTING ROAD SECTION 1) Around 7 % of walk trips observed with 148 sample data 2) Around 70% of the walk trips fall in the range of < 1 km. 3) Major Interactions is towards Shopping bound trips 4) Noticeable walk trips observed at NTR APSRTC Bus stand towards Hospital Road with a walk distance range of <500 mtrs 5) Also similar walk trips observed at Railway station towards Brodipet main road for availing PT & IPT transit modes Source : House Hold Survey data, From GMC FOOTPATH MANOJ.S - 2200600043 101

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N CYCLE TRACKS - SURVEY SITE OBSERVED ISSUES On-street parking wide10mwayCarriage 2mdividerwide wide10mwayCarriageLack of cycle track S.No Colour Code Road Hierarchy Length ( KM ) Width ( M ) 1. ARTERIAL ROAD 312.84 >25 2. SUB ARTERIAL ROAD 306.03 20 25 3. collector street 309.45 15 20 Total Road Network 928.32 Encroachment Electricity Infrastructure COLLECTOR STREET Overall Road length KM Road width 18 M NO. of lane 4 lane 2 way Cycle track 6mwayCarriagewide2mdividerwide6mwayCarriagewide ARTERIAL ROAD Overall Road length KM Road width 26 M NO. of lane 6 lane 2 way Cycle track SUBARTERIAL ROAD Overall Road length KM Road width 22 M NO. of lane 4 lane 2 way 8mwayCarriagewide 2mdividerwide Carriage 8mwaywide MODE CHOICE - PRIMARY SURVEYINFERENCE Lack of cycle Lacktrackof cycle track Lack of cycle trackLack of cycle track Lack of cycle track EXISTING ROAD SECTION ➢Creation of a city-wide cycle track network and cycle-safe streets ➢Acity wide Public Bicycle Scheme with a detailed project report for a pilot project Bicycle Parking Facilities ➢Integration with Public Transit ➢Cycling Promotion ➢Adoption and use of Design Guidelines for planning and implementing cycle friendly infrastructure ➢Institutional Mechanisms, Capacitybuilding and Financial Planning for implementing the plan ➢Awareness and Education Campaigns CYCLE TRACKS MANOJ.S - 2200600043 102

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Exisiting Road Sections Stretch - 1 Road length 680 M Road width 8 M NO. of lane 1 Stretch 1 :- Ntr Bus Stand Boss Boma Center Stretch 3 : Naaz Center Railway Station Stretch - 3 Road length 370 M Road width 14 M NO. of lane 2 lane 2 way divided Stretch : 1 Boss boma center Stretch : 2 Naaz center Stretch :- 3 Road Stretch From Ntr Bus Stand – Railway Station Stretch 2 : Boss Boma Center Naaz Center Stretch - 2 Road length 230 M Road width 18 M NO. of lane 4 lane 2 way divided Vehicle Composition Stretch :-1 POINT :A 9:30 10:30 a.m POINT : B 10:45 11:45 a.m A B OBSERVED ISSUE Stretch :- 1 Stretch : 3 Stretch : 2 Stretch :- 1 conjunction due to autos and on street parking Stretch :- 2 on street parking Stretch :- 3 encroachment and onstreet parking C D NMT FACILITIES BETWEEN - TERNIMALS LOCATION INFERENCE ❖It is the shortest distance to provide the nmt between bus terminal and railway terminal ❖Total length is of 1.4 kms. ❖This 1.4 kms had divided into 4 points and 3 stretch. ❖Stretch : had the higher traffic or conjunction due to insufficient of row. NMT FACILITIES BETWEEN TERNIMALS MANOJ.S - 2200600043 103

TRAVEL DEMAND MODELING

• Capacity restraint • Intersection

•

capacity

VISUM other useful software available for transport It is designed for handling multimodal modelling capability and multimodal analysis. It can integrate most of the transport modes into one consistent network model. It is having a number of modules for different purposes. It supports four stage modelling process, which is described below: Trip generation: VISUM can generate trips using regression, cross classification, trip rate, daily activity schedules and time of day generation methods. Trip distribution: Trip distribution in VISUM can be performed using the gravity model, FRATAR method and trip chain building from activity schedules. Modal split: VISUM allows user specific models and nested logit method. Some specific visual basic scripts using VISUM’s objects and methods can also be used to develop logit models.

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 104NTRAVEL DEMAND MODELLING TRAVEL DEMAND MODELLING Need of travel demand modelling • Travel demand modelling helps make decisions on future developments of urban transport systems. • It forecasts the travel patterns for 15 25 years • Rationalizes infrastructure investments How many trips?Trip Generation Where will the trips goDistributionTrip What modes will they use?Mode Split What routes will they take? Traffic Assignment Traditional Four-Step Modelling 1. Trip Generation 2. Trip Distribution 3. Modal Split 4. Trip Assignment Iteration Modelling Techniques • Transport demand rough estimation • Trend Analysis method • Elasticity of demand method • Sequential transport demand model • Traditional four step model • Integrated Model • Activity based model • Simpler than activity based method • Less data requirement compared to activity based method Evolution of demand modelling • Developed in 1950s for Transportation studies in Chicago. • Considered travel demand as a function of land use.

•

planning applications.

•

Trip assignment: VISUM can perform traffic assignment using any of the following methods: All or nothing based restraint (Source: Sarkar, PK et al., 2017) Demand Modelling using VISUM

•

• Stochastic/ Probabilistic • Incremental • Equilibrium method • Dynamic

Trip ModeTripGenerationDistributionChoice ProductionRates (inhabitantattributesZones,jobs) MatrixSkim FunctionUtility Productions,Attractions(perzone) modeMatrixSkimper Utility Attribute Deman d Matrix dDemanMatrix dDemanMatrix dDemanMatrixdDemanMatrix Assignment Assignment Assignment DARSAN-2200600039

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR 105NFOUR STAGE MODELLING TRAVEL DEMAND MODELLING Trip Assignment Variant used: Equilibrium Assignment: • Path based • Distributes demand such that impedance is the same on all alternative routes (Waldrop’s principle) • ~ "Every road user selects his route in such a way that the travel time on all alternative routes is the same, and that switching to a different route would increase personal travel time.“ 1. Trip Generation methods • Regression model (Regression Analysis) • Category analysis (Cross classification) Classic Trip Generation: 2. Trip Distribution models GrowthAverageUniformModelsFactorFactorFactorFratarmethodDetroitmethodFurnessmethod SyntheticModels Gravitymodel Opportunitymodels Gravity Model • Singly constrained: origin based • Singly constrained: Destination based • Doubly constrained (when productions and attractions are known) 3. Modal Split Determination of the choice of mode in transport modelling is called as modal split. The modal splits models are: • Aggregate model • Disaggregate model • Multinomial Logit Model • Nested Logit model • Multinomial Probit Model • Generalized extreme value model • Artificial Neural Network Model • Fuzzy Logic Based model • Hybrid Mode choice model 4. Trip Assignment TypesAssignmentTrip All or nothing assignment User equilibrium assignment System Optimum assignment Incremental assignment Capacity restraint assignment Dynamic assignmentStochasticassignmentuserequilibrium DARSAN-2200600039

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TRIP GENERATION The purpose of trip generation is to estimate the number of trip ends for each zones for the targeted year. The trip end is calculated for different travel purpose within the zone. ZONAL REGRESSION METHOD HH REGRESSION METHOD CATEGORY ANALYSIS PERSON TRIP MODELS 1 2 3 4 Two most used methods for Trip Generation are; ➢ Regression model ➢ Cross-classification (category analysis) ❑ No. of HH ❑ No. of students ❑ No. of workers ❑ etc. TAZ ‘i’ Why regression methods over other methods? ➢ Cross classification models are independent of zone system. ➢ No trip rate for cells with no observations. ➢ Category analysis need more variables and its hard to resurvey individuals for more variables ➢ Regression models provide good statistical fit wrt present data. ➢ It deals with dependent/independent variables whereas category analysis are best suited with discrete variables. SOCIO&HHLANDUSE- ECONOMIC URBANIZATIONACCESSIBILITY Quality transportof accessibilityZone Degree urbanizationof Distance from CBD Age and occupationstructureVehicleownership Income, family size and structurefamily Intensity Totalandpopulationno.ofHH TRIP GENERATION SHASHANK-2200600051 106

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PopulationPCTR Trip Production Trip Generation Built use area Trip Attraction rate Trip Production Observed TTFD Travel Time Skim Matrix Estimate Gravity Parameters Trip Distribution Modelled xTripTripValidationCurveTTFDofDistributionDistributionModalsharexPeakhourfactorModeObservedshareImpedancefunction decided on GEH value Trip Assignment Capacity of Observedroads LOS ModelledassignedVolumesonroadsLOS Validation of Trip Assignment Balancing with TripConstrainedDoublyattractiontotalEquilibriumAssignment DEMAND MODELLING METHODOLOGY 1. Trip Generation METHODOLOGY Current Travel Time Skim Matrix TAZ Trip Productions Trip Attractions 1 3881 29581 2 18462 35002 3 9930 8036 4 7867 21293 5 19653 17915 6 27850 23573 7 9036 31478 8 34007 23978 9 7154 65954 10 32746 99199 11 20062 13310 12 23571 7879 13 36272 18783 14 9016 3641 15 18637 2438 41 5673 3506 42 10956 18907 43 9553 39715 44 6077 10714 45 5714 51683 46 8549 3914 47 11421 4439 48 12889 10376 49 6450 3041 50 9174 19681 51 34063 24356 52 37297 41843 53 16805 6351 54 14719 24004 55 47146 0 56 5859 0 57 23284 0 58 9520 0 59 38785 0 60 24411 0 61 16984 0 TOTAL 952504 952504 DARSAN-2200600039 107

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TRIP PRODUCTION ➢ Liner regression is a statistical technique which uses relationships pertaining to dependent and independent variables. ➢ While dealing with trip generation equations, the number of trips will be dependent variable while various measurable factors influencing trip generation are considered as independent variables. ➢ The independent variables are the land-use and socio-economic characteristics such as income, car-ownership, family size and composition, land use characteristics etc. 35000300002500020000150001000050000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 tripsofNo. No. of Persons RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WARD/TAZ POPULATION AND TOTAL TRIPS GENERAL EQUATION, Y = M*X + C METHODOLOGY WARDZONINGWISE WARDPOPULATIONSAMPLEWISESAMPLETRIPSPCTRTOTAL POPULATION TOTALREGRESSIONTRIPS ANALYSIS BETWEEN (3) AND (4) 43 1 (2)/(1)2 TRIPEQUATIONPRODUCTION Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Intercept 664.9423275 1110.43127 0.598814 0.554479 No. of People 0.967551384 0.060460026 16.00316 5.61E 15 REGRESSION STATISTICS Multiple R 0.952803 R Square 0.877834 Adjusted R Square 0.90429 Standard Error 2445.417 Observations 62 TRIP PRODUCTIONS = 0.967*X + 664.94 Where, Y is dependent variable & x is independent variable. COEFFICIENT Trips/Population CONSTANT (5 10)% of Mean Trips R SQUARE >0.5 LEVEL SIGNIFICANCEOF 5% P VALUE <0.05 F >2 T STAT >4 SHASHANK-2200600051 KRISHNA-2200600046 TRIP PRODUCTION 108

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TRIP PRODUCTION (EDUCATIONAL TRIPS) 300002500020000150001000050000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 tripsEducational No. of students RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EDUCATIONAL TRIPS AND NO. OF STUDENTS WARDZONINGWISE EDUCATIONALPOPULATIONPOPULATIONSAMPLESTUDENTSAMPLETRIPSPCTRNO.OFSTUDENTSPERHHREGRESSIONANALYSIS BETWEEN (3) AND (4) 3 1 2 (3)/(2) EDUCATIONAL TRIP PRODUCTION EQUATION METHODOLOGY WARDWISE TOTAL NO. OF WARDWISESTUDENTSTOTAL EDUCATIONAL TRIPS (2)/(1) 4 (4) * (TOTAL POPULATION)WARD 5 (5) * (PCTR) EDUCATIONAL TRIP PRODUCTIONS = 0.65*X + 489.95 Where, X = Student Population of the ward/TAZ REGRESSION STATISTICS Multiple R 0.928031 R Square 0.861242 Adjusted R Square 0.854935 Standard Error 2071.888 Observations 62 Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Intercept 489.954294 676.5758828 0.724168 0.476594 No. of students 0.64740973 0.055403187 11.68542 6.61E 11 TRIP PRODUCTION SHASHANK-2200600051 109

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TRIP PRODUCTION (WORK TRIPS) WARDZONINGWISE SAMPLEPOPULATIONPOPULATIONSAMPLEWORKERSWORKTRIPSPCTRNO.OFWORKERSPERHHREGRESSIONANALYSIS BETWEEN (3) AND (4) 3 1 2 (3)/(2) WORK TRIP PRODUCTION EQUATION METHODOLOGY WARDWISE TOTAL NO. OF WARDWISEWORKERSTOTAL WORK TRIPS (2)/(1) 4 (4) * (TOTAL POPULATION)WARD 5 (5) * (PCTR) 35000300002500020000150001000050000 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 tripsWork No.of workers RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN WORK TRIPS AND NO. OF WORKERS WORK BASED TRIP PRODUCTIONS = 1.07*X + 89.73 Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Intercept 169.4556864 1327.345278 0.127665 0.899524 No. of workers 1.069605172 0.180627927 5.921594 4.9E 06 REGRESSION STATISTICS Multiple R 0.777106192 R Square 0.603894034 Adjusted R Square 0.586672036 Standard Error 3723.832967 Observations 62 Where, X = workers Population of the ward/TAZ TRIP PRODUCTION KRISHNA-2200600046 110

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NTRIP ATTRACTION LANDUSE ATTRACTION RATES COMMERCIAL 0.78 PUBLIC SEMI PUBLIC 0.29 TRANSPORTATION 0.84 MANUFACTURING 0.02 Depending on the floor areas, the trip attraction can be determined from retail floor area, service and office floor area and manufacturing and wholesaling floor Zonalarea.tripattractions may be estimated as a j = ∑ b j (c)ta(c) Where, aj = number of work trips attracted by zone j. bj(c) = number of employment opportunities in category c. ta(c) = trip attraction rate of employment category c And the summation is over all employment types if work trip attractions are to be estimated. Trip attraction rate of different land use Due to the limitation on performing establishment surveys the trip attraction rate was borrowed from the Eluru Establishment Survey 2019 due to its similarities in land use characteristics and travel pattern . Identification of andConductingestablishmentsimportantprimarysurveycollectionofdetailslike Built up employeeTotal visitorsTotal Calculating trip attraction rates for different land use Estimating the share of trip attraction for each TAZ (using land use and trip attraction) Trip Attraction Methodology Establishment survey helps in accessing travel demand and land use implications on transport infrastructure. It is also used to Estimate trip attractions for different traffic analysis zones . Data required • Type of Establishment (Land Use) • Floor area of Establishment • Number of Employees and average daily visitors of Establishment • Travel mode used by employees and visitors to access establishment • Average distance commuted by employees and visitors • Timings of the establishment • Availability of parking and observed parking in the vicinity of establishments. Trip Attraction HAYCELIN-2200600040 111

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N NUMBERSTAZ COMMERCIAL PUBLIC SEMI PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MANUFACTURING TOTAL 1 32120.9047 385.3871 0 0.747802 32507.04 2 35369.3567 2296.771 0 798.151 38464.28 3 7480.28233 153.5436 0 1197.177 8831.003 4 21456.6724 1936.657 0 5.407142 23398.74 5 16616.3708 3052.971 0 17.41068 19686.75 6 19704.4303 6124.919 0 75.22607 25904.58 7 32149.4991 1567.478 723.739 150.2768 34590.99 8 23090.4096 3082.82 0 176.0751 26349.3 9 71882.2852 591.0284 0 4.095254 72477.41 10 107604.299 1171.179 0 233.9889 109009.5 11 14229.5029 207.0941 0 189.579 14626.18 12 8286.15977 358.4753 0 13.7719 8658.407 13 19052.2197 1548.436 0 39.47937 20640.14 14 2512.54005 1485.67 0 2.538956 4000.749 15 2183.55372 491.5751 0 3.952982 2679.082 16 50103.7253 8685.785 469.6217 22.26066 59281.39 17 4983.61673 73.89699 0 2.37868 5059.892 18 4287.61349 329.2961 0 617.3518 5234.261 19 8446.40793 1003.45 0 541.8319 9991.69 20 4614.26219 169.9492 0 10.89094 4795.102 21 11147.762 6294.756 0 2.514116 17445.03 22 4267.05437 407.3292 0 8.59095 4682.975 23 4104.00111 1073.208 0 0 5177.21 24 2591.44985 334.5422 0 0 2925.992 25 3588.9502 1119.735 0 0 4708.685 26 5887.92376 1350.104 0 0.170848 7238.199 27 1879.80285 230.3252 0 3.461186 2113.589 28 27773.8772 2880.874 0 0.247202 30655 29 30850.1707 3269.082 0 2.91006 34122.16 30 41432.4432 1934.796 0 0 43367.24 31 8314.91383 787.6346 0 0.312394 9102.861 32 8364.47012 955.3654 0 1.342562 9321.178 33 4161.92989 253.4295 0 0 4415.359 34 3007.46389 224.956 0 0 3232.42 35 1439.11139 77.66322 0 6.501412 1523.276 36 6280.8307 396.5959 0 19.52912 6696.956 37 9576.67341 6938.674 0 2.095 16517.44 38 2680.67601 177.9294 0 0 2858.605 39 3308.76982 71.22745 0 6.082238 3386.08 40 21503.0015 1011.317 0 21.18669 22535.51 41 3313.60462 538.6742 0 0 3852.279 42 20298.6422 465.9043 0 12.47844 20777.02 43 39104.7615 4530.852 0 7.285584 43642.9 44 10307.1345 1466.649 0 0 11773.78 45 34010.8338 12822.91 9957.139 3.881254 56794.77 46 4134.26278 162.4437 0 4.658886 4301.365 47 3991.95077 885.2162 0 1.355002 4878.522 48 8956.07185 2445.193 0 0.705924 11401.97 49 3021.926 319.8066 0 0 3341.733 50 16128.1537 5495.585 0 3.86112 21627.6 51 23119.4836 3622.717 0 22.55912 26764.76 52 37153.559 8792.92 0 34.84934 45981.33 53 5399.56064 1580.001 0 0 6979.562 54 22350.8197 4023.765 0 3.843858 26378.43 919626.152 111658.6 11150.5 4273.015 TAZ WISE TRIP ATTRACTION Total trips attracted including NMT = 1,046,708 COMMERCIAL88% PUBLICPUBLICSEMI11% TRANSPORTATION1%MANUFACTURING0.4%COMMERCIAL PUBLIC SEMI PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION MANUFACTURING TRIP ATTRACTION HAYCELIN-2200600040 112

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ZONES WITH PREDOMINANT TRIP PRODUCTION AND ATTRACTION SPATIAL COMPARISIONTRIPPRODUCTIONTRIPATTRACTIONInference The map shows the spatial arrangement of the trip production as well as the trip attraction within the city. The zone with predominant trip attractions have commercial as well as industrial characteristics . HAYCELIN-2200600040 113

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N 114 SKIM MATRIX (CURRENT TRAVEL TIME) - PART BASE YEAR MODELLING TAZ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2.9 5.7 16.9 25.1 42.1 25.7 15.2 38.1 30.1 10.2 14.1 17.7 26.9 24.2 20.7 21.8 18.0 14.2 15.3 16.7 17.8 17.1 17.9 21.2 15.4 26.3 23.7 21.1 20.8 26.0 29.0 2 5.7 2.7 21.8 30.0 47.0 30.6 20.1 43.0 35.0 15.1 19.0 22.6 31.7 29.0 25.6 26.7 22.9 19.1 20.2 21.5 22.7 22.0 22.8 26.0 20.3 31.2 28.6 26.0 25.7 30.9 33.9 3 17.5 22.3 3.0 12.1 35.1 34.4 24.8 28.6 19.6 15.1 6.8 7.2 16.4 15.6 10.2 15.0 12.7 6.2 10.0 9.3 14.7 17.0 19.2 20.9 20.3 24.9 22.3 22.2 19.4 20.5 21.8 4 25.4 30.2 12.1 3.5 31.5 37.1 32.7 25.1 16.0 23.0 12.6 7.3 12.8 13.1 7.2 20.5 18.7 15.1 18.9 17.8 23.2 25.9 28.2 26.3 28.2 30.4 27.8 27.7 24.4 24.3 24.0 5 43.2 48.0 35.0 31.7 2.4 12.1 27.9 4.8 11.9 33.8 32.2 28.9 22.9 25.8 26.6 22.2 25.6 31.0 31.1 28.9 25.0 28.6 30.3 22.7 26.1 20.3 21.6 20.9 19.3 16.2 17.5 6 26.4 31.1 34.3 37.2 11.7 2.4 11.0 9.6 17.5 19.7 28.8 31.1 28.5 28.6 32.1 18.3 21.3 27.6 21.6 23.6 15.9 18.6 20.3 12.7 16.1 11.5 12.4 10.9 16.2 16.1 20.8 7 15.2 19.9 23.7 31.9 26.7 10.3 2.7 24.6 32.5 8.5 20.9 24.5 33.2 28.4 27.5 19.9 17.4 21.0 14.4 19.0 15.9 12.2 10.6 13.8 5.3 15.4 15.7 12.2 18.1 23.1 25.7 8 39.4 44.1 28.6 25.2 4.7 10.0 25.7 1.3 5.5 29.6 25.5 22.5 16.5 19.1 20.1 15.6 19.0 24.3 24.5 22.2 18.4 22.9 24.6 17.0 23.0 13.8 15.0 17.6 12.7 9.5 10.8 9 30.1 34.8 19.2 15.9 11.7 17.3 33.0 5.2 1.4 27.7 16.8 13.1 7.2 14.2 10.8 19.6 21.5 20.1 23.8 22.8 22.9 27.5 29.2 25.1 31.3 24.4 24.1 25.9 19.0 16.8 14.1 10 9.6 14.4 13.8 22.0 32.5 19.2 8.8 27.8 26.9 0.9 10.9 14.6 23.7 20.0 17.6 11.5 9.0 11.0 6.0 9.5 7.5 5.4 3.8 7.1 1.9 16.0 13.4 7.0 10.4 15.7 18.7 11 14.3 19.1 6.6 13.0 31.8 28.8 21.6 25.3 17.0 12.0 0.6 1.9 13.4 7.7 7.5 9.4 7.4 1.2 7.7 3.7 12.2 14.7 16.9 15.3 17.1 19.3 16.7 16.6 13.8 14.9 16.2 12 18.1 22.8 7.3 7.2 29.1 31.7 25.4 22.6 13.5 15.7 1.9 0.7 10.3 5.5 1.3 12.4 10.4 6.8 12.0 7.6 15.1 18.7 20.9 18.2 20.9 22.3 19.7 19.6 16.3 16.6 16.4 13 27.2 31.9 16.4 13.0 22.3 27.9 34.2 15.8 6.7 24.8 13.4 10.3 1.0 2.8 2.5 13.9 15.6 16.1 21.0 15.6 17.3 21.9 23.5 19.8 26.7 23.5 20.9 21.2 15.8 15.3 11.6 14 24.8 29.5 15.5 12.9 25.7 28.1 29.0 19.2 14.0 21.1 7.5 5.5 2.6 0.3 2.5 8.7 10.1 10.2 15.1 9.7 12.0 16.6 18.3 14.6 21.5 18.6 16.0 15.9 10.9 10.2 10.0 15 21.1 25.9 10.3 7.1 26.7 32.3 28.4 20.3 11.2 18.7 7.5 1.3 2.5 2.7 0.7 13.8 12.1 11.1 14.9 11.7 16.6 20.1 22.4 19.7 23.9 23.7 21.1 21.0 16.0 15.4 15.1 16 22.0 26.7 14.4 19.3 21.2 17.7 20.2 14.7 19.1 12.2 8.9 11.2 13.5 8.7 12.8 0.8 1.6 7.7 7.1 5.0 1.7 6.2 7.9 4.2 12.0 8.2 5.7 5.6 2.7 4.3 5.6 17 18.2 23.0 12.3 17.9 24.8 20.5 17.8 18.2 21.2 9.9 7.1 9.9 15.0 10.0 11.5 1.7 0.3 5.1 3.7 0.6 1.9 5.4 7.7 7.0 10.3 11.0 8.5 8.4 5.5 7.8 9.2 18 14.6 19.4 6.1 15.1 30.5 27.4 21.9 23.9 20.4 12.3 1.2 7.0 15.7 10.0 11.1 8.0 5.1 0.6 7.1 1.5 9.4 13.0 15.2 13.9 17.4 17.9 15.4 15.3 12.4 13.5 14.8 19 15.5 20.2 9.6 18.6 29.9 21.0 14.7 23.3 23.9 6.7 7.4 11.8 20.4 15.0 14.6 7.0 3.7 6.8 1.2 2.4 3.0 2.3 4.6 6.4 7.2 11.5 8.9 7.8 6.0 11.3 14.2 20 16.8 21.6 8.9 17.6 28.3 23.3 19.5 21.7 23.1 10.3 3.5 7.5 15.4 9.7 11.1 5.1 0.6 1.5 2.4 0.3 3.6 7.1 9.4 9.8 12.0 13.8 11.2 11.1 8.3 11.3 12.6 21 18.0 22.8 14.1 22.1 24.1 15.3 16.2 17.5 22.5 8.3 11.8 14.1 16.9 12.0 15.6 1.7 1.9 9.4 3.1 3.5 0.5 3.8 5.5 1.8 8.7 5.9 3.3 3.2 0.9 5.5 8.5 22 17.2 22.0 16.6 25.6 27.9 18.3 12.5 22.3 27.3 5.4 14.4 17.5 21.1 16.3 19.1 6.5 5.3 12.8 2.3 6.9 3.7 0.6 1.3 2.7 5.0 8.8 6.2 4.0 4.4 10.3 13.3 23 17.5 22.2 18.8 27.8 29.2 19.6 10.9 24.1 29.0 3.8 16.6 19.8 23.4 18.5 21.3 8.3 7.5 15.1 4.6 9.1 5.8 1.3 0.3 0.6 3.4 10.6 8.0 2.2 6.1 12.0 15.0 24 20.9 25.7 20.4 25.3 21.9 12.3 14.1 16.9 24.5 7.3 15.0 17.3 19.6 14.8 18.8 4.5 7.4 13.8 6.4 9.8 2.0 2.7 0.6 0.3 4.5 2.8 0.8 0.9 2.3 7.7 10.3 25 15.0 19.7 19.1 27.3 25.5 15.8 5.3 22.7 31.3 1.9 16.3 19.9 26.0 21.2 22.9 12.2 10.2 16.4 7.2 11.8 8.6 5.0 3.4 4.4 0.8 9.5 8.2 4.1 10.0 15.6 18.2 26 26.7 31.4 24.5 29.3 19.7 11.3 15.9 13.7 24.8 16.9 19.0 21.3 22.7 18.8 22.9 8.5 11.4 17.8 11.7 13.8 6.0 8.8 10.5 2.9 9.7 0.9 1.8 3.7 5.9 7.5 12.0 27 24.0 28.7 21.8 26.7 21.3 12.0 16.1 14.8 23.4 14.2 16.3 18.6 19.9 16.2 20.2 5.8 8.8 15.1 9.1 11.1 3.4 6.1 7.8 0.8 8.2 1.7 0.4 1.1 2.4 5.5 8.1 28 20.9 25.6 21.8 26.7 20.1 10.5 12.6 17.2 25.4 7.2 16.4 18.6 21.0 16.2 20.2 5.8 8.8 15.2 7.8 11.2 3.4 4.1 2.2 0.9 4.3 3.7 1.1 0.5 3.7 8.5 11.1 29 20.9 25.7 18.7 23.4 18.7 15.6 18.2 12.1 18.3 11.1 13.3 15.3 14.8 11.2 15.9 2.7 5.7 12.0 6.0 8.1 0.9 4.1 5.8 2.1 9.9 5.8 2.4 3.5 0.5 2.1 3.0 30 27.3 32.1 18.9 23.2 15.8 15.8 23.4 9.3 16.9 17.6 13.5 15.1 14.6 10.1 14.8 3.5 6.9 12.2 12.4 10.2 6.3 10.9 12.6 7.5 15.5 7.5 5.5 8.3 2.2 0.4 2.8 • Intra Zonal Travel time : Half of the lowest value in the row DARSAN-2200600039

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N �� =�� • Double constrained balancing by multi procedure’ feature was used In Visum • Detterence Function used : Tanner function • Current travel time (Loaded Network) skim matrix is used for trip distribution ��= ��.�� • % Error between observed and modelled Travel Time Frequency Distribution (TTFD) percentages should be less than 15% • As Outer Cordon Surveys were not performed regional trips has not been captured Observed average trip time: 25.63 Modelled average trip time: 17.37 minutes Validation of Trip Distribution 2. Trip Distribution Travel time Observedsamples)(~4000 Modelled Difference % % Error 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0000 0--15 36.46 43.86 7.40 20.2877 15--30 44.48 44.69 0.22 0.4855 30-45 13.00 11.05 1.94 14.9622 45--90 6.06 0.40 5.67 93.4826 90+ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0000 TAZ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 130 155 34 88 70 96 133 93 263 420 2 623 753 160 416 332 455 632 443 1251 1996 3 317 375 89 231 181 237 328 243 689 1051 4 248 293 69 189 146 188 257 197 557 822 5 588 694 161 435 397 505 649 520 1405 1988 6 864 1021 227 600 542 727 955 719 1937 2900 7 291 343 76 198 169 232 319 224 604 975 8 1012 1196 280 755 672 866 1113 895 2439 3428 9 220 259 61 164 139 179 230 187 521 728 10 1055 1247 280 729 594 806 1118 794 2194 3563 11 638 754 175 459 365 481 661 490 1384 2116 12 744 880 206 550 433 562 771 583 1648 2468 13 1119 1323 310 835 682 878 1160 917 2594 3711 14 278 328 77 206 167 216 290 224 626 925 Modelled OD Matrix sample 6040200 80 100 0 0--15 15--30 30-45 45--90 90+ TTFD Curve Observed (~4000 samples) Modelled 60.040.020.00.0 80.0 100.0 0 0--15 36.4619 44.4767 45--90 0.0000 TTFD Curve (Cumulative) Observed (~4000 samples) Modelled TRIP DISTRIBUTION DARSAN-2200600039 115

Neuro fuzzy model ( Hybrid model): Adaptive neuro fuzzy classifier model will have improved ‘distinguish ability’ in terms of less overlapping amongst classes, so that the prediction ability is highly improved. In most of them the issue of differentiating between overlapping classes with high reliability persists. Overlapping classes can significantly hinder the classifier performance. Generally, to overcome this problem, the input space is projected into a new space however, it might lead to loss in the meaning of the original features.

117

Multinomial logit model: Logit modelling approach is the conventional method generally adopted for analysing mode choice behaviour, which is based on the principle of random utility maximization derived from econometric theory. Input variables need to have crisp values and hence should be measured accurately which consumes lot of time and resources & it is Deterministic in nature. is chosen over other choice models: Artificial neural network methods: ANN models usually involves four stages namely selection of problem, designing of network, topology model training with the help of learning paradigms and evaluation of trained network for unseen Itdata.suffers from the lack of methods for the interpretation of the significance of input variable and statistical goodness of fits for validating the developed ANN model.

MODE CHOICE MODELLING

ANN Model Inspired by human neural system Depends on network topology, learning algorithm training & activationadoptedfunction Difficult to interpret the result in Somelanguagenaturaltimesfaceslocalminima

An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR

In large networks with multilayer and large number of neurons and connections, a huge number of numeric values for the weights will make the results extremely difficult to interprets .

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada

Fuzzy logic: Fuzzy logic try to harness the human knowledge which is often guided by approximations by accepting input values in linguistic terms. The fuzzy rule base comprises several IF-THEN rules which closely resemble human knowledge and decision-making. The results obtained from fuzzy logic results gave better prediction accuracy in comparison to the traditional MNL model. Thus it can be concluded that the fuzzy logic models were better able to capture and incorporate the human knowledge and reasoning into mode choice behaviour.

Error term should be identical independentlyanddistributed Suffer identicalindependencefromfromalternativeassumption

Why fuzzy logic

Model name Basic Hypothesis Major Constraints Major drawbacks Logit Model Extreme value of distribution

FuzzyTheoryset Based assumptionon Commensurabilityof Input value should be fuzzy No learning ability & difficulty in Membershipdecidingfunction

SHASHANKMITRADEV-2200600044-2200600051

NF Model ( Hybrid Model) Combine human learning ability & uncertainty Pre-processing of input training data is required Better algorithm needs to be defined for multi situationchoice

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR MODE CHOICE MODELLING Mode Choice Modelling using Fuzzy Logic(Base Year): Membership Functions: Travel Time Travel Cost Comfort Mode Development of Membership Function: SHASHANKMITRADEV-2200600044-2200600051 118

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR MODE CHOICE MODELLING Rule Base generation: Rule Viewer: Output: Prediction Accuracy: Modelled output/ Observed Output 606+674+318+8 1614 = 1606 1614 X 100 = 99.50% SHASHANKMITRADEV-2200600044-2200600051 119

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR RESULTS 403020100 50 60 -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% CHANGE IN PT RIDERSHIP WRT TT &TC Series1 Series2 Expon. (Series2) TT reduction % change TC changes % change Share of PT -80% 56.88 0.36 -60% 41.88 0.42 37.48 0.40 -40% 29.49 0.26 26.77 0.17 -20% 23.48 0.14 22.86 0.13 -10% 20.63 0.04 20.2 0.02 0 19.8 0.01 19.8 0.03 10% 19.58 0.05 20.51 0.09 20% 18.59 0.22 18.9 0.14 40% 15.2 0.09 16.54 0.12 60% 14 14.81 0.14 80% 13.01 -0.05-0.100.000.050.100.150.200.250.300.350.400.45-100% -50% 0% 50% 100% % CHANGE IN PT RIDERSHIP WRT TT & TC Series1 Series2 TT reduction TC changes TC changes TT reduction Share of PT Price Elasticity -80% 56.88 187.27% 0.01 -60% 41.88 111.52% 37.48 89.29% 0.02 0.02 -40% 29.49 48.94% 26.77 35.20% 0.01 0.02 -20% 23.48 18.59% 22.86 15.45% 0.03 0.03 -10% 20.63 4.19% 20.2 2.02% 0.01 0.02 0 19.8 0.00% 19.8 0.00% 0 0 10% 19.58 1.11% 20.51 3.59% 0.04 0.02 20% 18.59 6.11% 18.9 4.55% 0.03 0.05 40% 15.2 23.23% 16.54 16.46% 0.01 0.01 60% 14 -29.29% 14.81 -25.20% 0.01 80% 13.01 ➢ If, Price elasticity > -1; ELASTIC ➢ If, Price elasticity < -1; INELASTIC MODE CHOICE MODELLING PRICE ELASTICITY – It is the consumer’s demand responsiveness to change in price. Price Elasticity of Demand % change in Quantity demanded = % change in Price 0.030.020.010 0.04 0.060.05 -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% PED wrt TRAVEL TIME 0 0.005 0.0450.0350.0250.0150.010.020.030.04 -100% -80% -60% -40% -20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% PED wrt TRAVEL COST ➢ PE is higher when TT is increased by 20%. ➢ PE is higher when TC is increased by 10%. SHASHANKMITRADEV-2200600044-2200600051 122

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N 123 4. Trip Assignment Routes considered: • Public Transport: • 7 Routes of APSRTC • 11 Private Bus Routes • IPT Fixed route: • 7 Routes of IPT 6 seater • 12 Routes of IPT 3 seater BASE YEAR MODELLING Network considered in modelling Links with Public Transport Links with IPT – fixed route Links with Private transport & IPT Mode Network access Private Modes Cars Open to all links Two wheelers Intermediate Public Transport IPT Non Fixed IPT Fixed 3 seater Limited to links with IPT fixed routeIPT Fixed 6 seater Public Transport APSRTC Bus Limited to links with Bus routesPrivate Bus DARSAN-2200600039

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N 6 2 4 53 1 TRIP ASSIGNMENT • V/C ratio calculated considering 10% of volume as peak hr volume • Goods vehicles have been excluded from the observed as its excluded in the model • The PuT PCU values were calculated and added to the PrT PCU manually from the number of vehicle journeys through the road section. The GEH Statistic is a Formula in traffic modelling used to compare two sets of traffic volumes. For traffic modelling work in the "baseline" scenario, GEH of less than 5.0 is considered a good match between the modelled and observed hourly volumes. 85% of the volumes in a traffic model should have a GEH less than 5.0. Validation of Trip Assignment • Impedance: Current Time • PrT Assignment method : Equilibrium Method ( 5 Step Increment of 20% each; Maximum Iteration 5) • PuT Assignment Method : Timetable based TRIP ASSIGNMENT LocatioSurveyTVC n Type locationSurveyof Directional/Combined Cap. ObservedPeakHourVolume(PCUs) ObservedV/Cratio ModelledVolume(PCUs) ModelledV/Cratio ValueGEH % (((modellederrorobserved) * 100 )/observed) 1 OC Inward 2700 335 0.12 446 0.17 7.91 32.99 2 OC Inward 2700 908.4 0.34 774 0.29 6.55 14.80 3 MB Combined 8400 3484.8 0.41 3847 0.46 8.45 10.39 4 MB Combined 5400 6490.8 1.20 6536 1.21 0.80 0.70 5 MB Combined 5400 3636 0.67 1956 0.36 44.93 46.20 6 OC Inward 1200 201 0.17 556 0.46 25.81 176.62 Mode Percentage Trips Two Wheeler 37.80 360011 IPT (Excluding Fixed route) 34.14 325142 IPT Fixed 3 seater 5.33 50775 IPT Fixed 6 seater 2.44 23238 Bus APSRTC 6.66 63412 Bus PVT 13.14 125165 Car 0.50 4762 TOTAL 100 952504 Mode SurveySplitLocation Key Map DARSAN-2200600039 123

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Base Year Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – PT and IPT Base Year Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Two-Wheelers Base Year Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Cars Base Year Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Total TOTAL TRIPS: 58,773 MAX TRIPS: 10,533 TOTAL TRIPS: 36,001 MAX TRIPS: 9,437 TOTAL TRIPS: 476 MAX TRIPS: 240 TOTAL TRIPS: 95250 MAX TRIPS: 18,035 TRIP ASSIGNMENT DARSAN-2200600039 124

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Base Year Mode-wise Peak Hour Traffic – PT and IPT Base Year Mode-wise Peak Hour Traffic – Two-Wheelers Base Year Mode-wise Peak Hour Traffic – Cars Base Year Mode-wise Peak Hour Traffic – Total MAX TRIPS: 5099 MAX TRIPS: 72 MAX TRIPS: 1091 MAX TRIPS: 5866 TRIP ASSIGNMENT DARSAN-2200600039 125

PT MODELING

▪ Shifting from single occupancy private cars to high capacity transport corridors would drastically cut emissions, eliminate traffic congestion, better connect low income communities to the opportunities and resources they need.

INTRODUCTION

▪ Cube Voyager was designed to provide an open and userfriendly framework for modeling a wide variety of planning policies and improvements at the urban, regional and long distance level. Cube Voyager brings together these criteria with a comprehensive library of planning functions applied under the general Cube framework.

CUBE SOFTWARE

PUBLIC TRANSPORT ASSIGNMENT MODEL HIGHWAY NETWOK BUILDING PT ROUTES CODING PT ASSIGNMENT BASE YEAR MODEL VALIDATION CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD PPHPD CALCULATIONS PT Assignment Model – Broad Level Flow chart PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 126

▪ Public transport has the power to connect cities, or to push them apart. Quality, well designed transport systems are fast, comfortable, affordable, and most importantly, accessible. Access to safe, modern transport provides a true alternative to private car ownership, which is a major source of socioeconomic disparity and a massive contributor to climate change in cities all over the world.

VOYAGER

▪ Public Transit Provides advanced functionality for the study of public transit systems. Cube Voyager provides the capacity to study even the largest and most complex public transport systems. Unlimited lines, unlimited links and unlimited modes. Public transit services are coded as running in mixed traffic or on dedicated facilities. Automated processes for creating walk, automobile and transfer links between services. Ability to represent infrequent and time coordination. Point to point paths are found using a variety of techniques: all-or-nothing, stochastic multi path, or discrete route multi path

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT Assignment Model – Detailed Level Flow chart PUBLIC TRANSPORT ASSIGNMENT MODEL HIGHWAY NETWOK BUILDING PT ROUTES CODING PT ASSIGNMENT BASE YEAR MODEL VALIDATION CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD PPHPD CALCULATIONS Time/Distance Matrices ▪ Seating Capacities ▪ Crowd function ▪ VOT/Fare System ▪ Factor Files (PersonObservedTrips) LOADED PCU/PT TRIPS NETWORK Boarding & Alighting Data Bus Stops Information Stop WiseGraphsLoading ScenariosFuture INPUTMODEL OUTPUT ANALYSIS DATA PROCESSING PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 127

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT Base Year-2021 Model Development Stages Highway Network Development ➢ Base year_2021 Network Created ➢ Road types categorised based on type Journey speed, Distance etc ➢Validating with other Link Speed characteristics such as ▪ Lanes ▪ Capacity ▪ ROW/Design Speed/Observed Speed ▪ One way/Two way. Etc PT Line Coding ➢PT Line coding for Different Routes 1) APSRTC Govt Routes 2) Private Bus Routes 3) IPT Routes_Auto6_seater 4) IPT Routes Auto3_seater ➢PT Line coding done for Private Bus Route no 02 highlighted with yellow color. ➢Highway Skim Matrix crated for (61x61) TAZs ➢Time Distance Based Skim Matrices provide as a primary input for the model to run the Assignment process Skim Matrices ➢ CreationHighwayNetwork ➢ Loaded NetworkvehiclesprivatePCU PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 128

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Base year (2021) Model Validation LocationSurveyCode- SurveyNameLocation ObservedTrips ModelledTrips Difference(%) SL01 Shankar Villas 5,815 5,183 11% SL03 Pattabipuram ROB 2,370 2,462 4% MB02 Near CircleGujjanagula 4,169 4,601 10% OC02 Near PalemAbhineguntla 1,228 1,125 8% Total 13,582 13,371 8% Source : TVC Survey data available for 2017 ; hence projected to till 2021 ➢ The Person Trips Difference observed between Modelled Counts & Observed Traffic Survey data varies from location to location. ➢ The observed difference between these two variable data sets is to be on an average of around 8% MODELLED BASE YEAR-2021 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN -LINE RIDERSHIP PEAKOBSERVEDHOURTRIPS Difference ROUTECODE VEHICLETYPE CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONLOADPPHPD CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONLOADPPHPD UP RIDERSHIPLINEONLY Trips (%) GBRT01 APSRTCBUS 3,217 1,011 19,462 1,537 1,344 333 33% GBRT02 APSRTCBUS 2,764 554 4,802 1,245 112 442 80% GBRT03 APSRTCBUS 3,975 359 2,125 263 504 145 40% GBRT04 APSRTCBUS 506 67 675 67 112 45 67% GBRT05 APSRTC BUS 4,313 445 8,134 643 448 3 1% GBRT06 APSRTCBUS 14,285 1,549 18,300 1,505 1,400 149 10% GBRT07 APSRTCBUS 1,908 208 1,715 209 168 -40 19% Total 30,969 4,193 55,214 5,469 4,088 -105 Avg-5% ➢ Based on the APSRTC Schedule information Model validation carried out for the Up line direction only. ➢ GBRT05,06&07 Routes observed to be a close figures w.r.t to Modelled Counts ➢ The observed difference between these two variable data sets is found out to be on an average of around 5% PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 129

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N BASE YEAR MODELLING – (2021) MODELLED BASE YEAR-2021 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) RIDERSHIPUP-LINE DOWNRIDERSHIP-LINE ROUTECODE VEHICLETYPE ROUTE DETAILS CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONLOADPPHPD CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONLOADPPHPD GBRT01 APSRTCBUS Guntur Vijayawada (Via Peddakakani) 3,217 1,011 19,462 1,537 GBRT02 APSRTCBUS Guntur Nandivelugu ( Via Uppalapadu) 2,764 554 4,802 1,245 GBRT03 APSRTCBUS Guntur Tenali (via Narakoduru) 3,975 359 2,125 263 GBRT04 APSRTCBUS Guntur Prathipadu (Via Etukuru) 506 67 675 67 GBRT05 APSRTCBUS Guntur Chilakaluripeta (via chowdavaram) 4,313 445 8,134 643 GBRT06 APSRTCBUS Guntur Perecherla (Via ChuttuGunta & Nallapadu) 14,285 1,549 18,300 1,505 GBRT07 APSRTC BUS Guntur Amaravthi (Via Lodge center) 1,908 208 1,715 209 Total 30,969 4,193 55,214 5,469 MODELLED BASE YEAR-2021 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN -LINE RIDERSHIP ROUTE CODE VEHICLE TYPE ROUTE DETAILS CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD PVBRT02 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Kakani Temple 130 60 25 24 PVBRT03 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Gundavaram 20 5 39 7 PVBRT05 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Kanteru 120 48 20 19 PVBRT06 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Namburu 150 60 25 24 PVBRT07 MINI PVT BUS PVK Naidu Market Yanamadala 30 8 181 54 PVBRT12 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Station Yanamadala 50 8 61 10 PVBRT13 MINI PVT BUS PVK Naidu Market Kornepadu 9 2 26 11 PVBRT15 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand SVN Colony (Via koritipadu) 23,973 1,664 22,160 1,681 PVBRT23 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand SVN Colony (Via pattabhipuram) 748 63 1,077 186 PVBRT24 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Gorantla (Via lodge Center) 337 63 618 90 PVBRT27 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand SVN Colony (Via lakshmipuram Main Road) 6,351 689 9,048 1,231 Total 31,917 2,668 33,278 3,338 ➢ Link wise PT Volume for both Up-Line & Down Line Ridership PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 130

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N BASE YEAR MODELLING – (2021) MODELLED BASE YEAR-2021 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN-LINE RIDERSHIP ROUTECODE VEHICLE TYPE ROUTE DETAILS CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD IPTRT01 AUTO 3 SEATER NTR Bus stand Namburu Via Auto nagar & NH 16 4,149 966 1,631 209 IPTRT02 AUTO 3 SEATER NTR Bus stand Mangalagiri Via Auto nagar & NH 16 5,993 824 2,005 171 IPTRT03 AUTO 3 SEATER NTR Bus stand Tenali Via Narakoduru 6,811 487 2,942 302 IPTRT04 AUTO 3 SEATER GNT market Prathipadu Via Etukuru 1,563 185 5,795 631 IPTRT05 AUTO 3 SEATER GNT market Edlapadu Via Chowdavaram 88 24 11,991 1,309 IPTRT06 AUTO 3 SEATER Lodge Center Lam Via Gorantla 4,719 823 13,312 1,663 IPTRT07 AUTO-3 SEATER Reliance Bunk --Gorantla Via Guntur Inner Ring Road 91 91 257 257 IPTRT08 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Gujjanagundla circle Via Koritipadu 1,550 291 790 118 IPTRT09 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Gujjanagundla circle Via lakshmi Puram 3,970 420 2,505 303 IPTRT10 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Guntur Railway Station Via Nazz Center 10,041 1,491 4,852 857 IPTRT11 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Gaddipadu old NH 5 934 206 140 67 IPTRT12 AUTO-7 SEATER NTR Bus stand --Manipuram old NH-5 528 193 433 122 IPTRT13 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Old Guntur Via Balaji Nagar 204 123 606 323 IPTRT14 AUTO 7 SEATER BR Stadium IDP Colony Via Gangi Bazar 348 84 957 241 IPTRT15 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Naidupeta Via Donka Road 12,746 1,102 11,143 930 IPTRT16 AUTO 7 SEATER Ramesh Hospital Pattabipuram Via Collector Office Road 9,732 2,287 3,759 989 IPTRT17 AUTO 7 SEATER PVK Market AT Agraharam Via Nagarampalem 92 32 191 66 IPTRT18 AUTO 7 SEATER PVK Market APHB colony Via Nagarampalem 449 129 2,148 544 Total 64,007 9,758 65,456 9,101 PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 131

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT Assignment – Base year 2021-PPHPD Calculations 1) GOVT Bus Routes – APSRTC Routes MODELLED BASE YEAR-2021 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN -LINE RIDERSHIP ROUTE CODE CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD GBRT01 3,217 1,011 19,462 1,537 GBRT02 2,764 554 4,802 1,245 GBRT03 3,975 359 2,125 263 GBRT04 506 67 675 67 GBRT05 4,313 445 8,134 643 GBRT06 14,285 1,549 18,300 1,505 GBRT07 1,908 208 1,715 209 Total 30,969 4,193 55,214 5,469 GBRT01-(Down-line) – Boarding & Alighting Graph GBRT01-(Up-line) – Boarding & Alighting PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 132

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT Assignment – Base year 2021-PPHPD Calculations MODELLED BASE YEAR-2021 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN -LINE RIDERSHIP ROUTE CODE CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD PVBRT02 130 60 25 24 PVBRT03 20 5 39 7 PVBRT05 120 48 20 19 PVBRT06 150 60 25 24 PVBRT07 30 8 181 54 PVBRT12 50 8 61 10 PVBRT13 9 2 26 11 PVBRT15 23,973 1,664 22,160 1,681 PVBRT23 748 63 1,077 186 PVBRT24 337 63 618 90 PVBRT27 6,351 689 9,048 1,231 Total 31,917 2,668 33,278 3,338 2) Mini-Private Bus Routes PVBRT15-(Up-line) – Boarding & Alighting Graph PVBRT15-(Down-line) – Boarding & Alighting Graph PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 133

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT Assignment – Base year 2021-PPHPD Calculations MODELLED BASE YEAR-2021 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN -LINE RIDERSHIP ROUTE CODE CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD PVBRT15 23,973 1,664 22,160 1,681 2) Mini-Private Bus Routes PVBRT15-(Up-line) – Boarding & Alighting Graph PVBRT15-(Down-line) – Boarding & Alighting Graph PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 134

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N MODELLED BASE YEAR-2021 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN -LINE RIDERSHIP ROUTE CODE CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTION LOAD PPHPD IPTRT01 4,149 966 1,631 209 IPTRT02 5,993 824 2,005 171 IPTRT03 6,811 487 2,942 302 IPTRT04 1,563 185 5,795 631 IPTRT05 88 24 11,991 1,309 IPTRT06 4,719 823 13,312 1,663 IPTRT07 91 91 257 257 IPTRT08 1,550 291 790 118 IPTRT09 3,970 420 2,505 303 IPTRT10 10,041 1,491 4,852 857 IPTRT11 934 206 140 67 IPTRT12 528 193 433 122 IPTRT13 204 123 606 323 IPTRT14 348 84 957 241 IPTRT15 12,746 1,102 11,143 930 IPTRT16 9,732 2,287 3,759 989 IPTRT17 92 32 191 66 IPTRT18 449 129 2,148 544 Total 64,007 9,758 65,456 9,101 PT Assignment – Base year 2021-PPHPD Calculations 3) IPT Auto Routes PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 135

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL 665 673 696 704 728 743 756 Priority Bus Stop Ordinary Bus Stop GBRT01 Route PT Assignment – Bus Stops prioritization ▪ For the GBRT01 Bus route from Guntur – Vijayawada towards Max section load PPHPD observed to be 1011 Person Trips at Node no 665 (NTR Bus Stand) for the Up line direction & similarly 1537 trips observed at Node No 814 (Nagarjuna University) in Down line Direction ▪Priority Bus Stops are highlighted in yellow color UP-LINE RIDERSHIP CORRIDOR PPHPD 3,217 SECTION LOAD PPHPD 1,011 Node Nos Bus stop Name Boarding Alighting Volume in Person Trips 665 NTR Bus Stand 1,011 0 1,011 673 Old Club Road 146 497 661 696 Nehru Nagar 2 128 535 704 Udaya Hospitals 1 97 439 728 Vasavi Cloth Market 1 127 313 743 Mangaldas Nagar 0 113 201 756 Reliance Petrol Pump (IRR) 0 144 57 777 Auto Nagar 0 57 0 1,162 1,162 3,217 DOWN LINE RIDERSHIP CORRIDOR PPHPD 19,462 SECTION LOAD PPHPD 1,537 Node Nos Bus stop Name Boarding Alighting Volume in Person Trips 814 Nagarjuna University 1,537 0 1,537 813 Namburu 39 53 1,523 812 Venegalla 39 53 1,509 810 Peddakakani Junction 39 54 1,494 809 Peddakakani Junction 39 54 1,480 804 Peddakakani Police station 38 56 1,462 797 Guntur NH 16 Entrance 38 56 1,444 777 Guntur Auto Nagar 33 58 1,420 756 Reliance Petrol Pump (IRR) 99 196 1,323 743 Mangaldas Nagar 88 105 1,305 728 Vasavi Cloth Market 105 99 1,312 704 Udaya Hospitals 105 100 1,317 696 Nehru Nagar 88 120 1,285 673 Old Club Road 238 471 1,051 665 NTR Bus Stand 0 1,051 0 2,526 2,526 19,462 Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 136

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL PT Assignment – Bus Stops Overview • Bus stop located Opposite PVK Market • Misutilization Levels Pvt Bus Routes ▪ Operates with 11 routes covering both urban & regional areas. ▪ Only 4 routes serving with in the core CBD Area. ▪ Bus stop infrastructure is severely lacking ▪ Considerable good amount of ridership observed IPT Fixed Routes ▪ Operates with 19 routes covering both urban & regional areas. ▪ Issues Un-organised structure ▪ Fare competition between different public & private operators ▪ Parking Constraints • Un-Sheltered Bus Stops in Palnadu Bus stand ➢ APSRTC Bus stops Coverage – 400 mtrs circular Buffer ▪ APSRTC Routes ▪ GBRT01 07 ▪ Bus stop Coverage 400 mtrs walking range ▪ Coverage for major Arterial & Sub Arterial roads. ➢ Pvt Bus stops Coverage – 400 mtrs circular Buffer Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 137

parking • Improper NMT facilities 138

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N • Severity along and incoming traffic in existing road network • Scattered pedestrian crossings Prepared by: ENVIRONMENT & SAFETY GROUP ABHIJIT SAHANI 2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K 2200600052 NAMBURI KRUSHNA BHUSHAN 2200600045 ISSUES • Moderate AQI of Guntur city • Unsignalised and unmonitored intersections ISSUES ISSUES Naaz Center, Guntur city Base year AQI map, Guntur city Most of the intersection in the Guntur city and its peripheral areas are unsignalized and unmonitoredAsperthebase year analysis the Guntur is experiencing the moderate AQI as 140 which is unhealthy and creates various breathing issues. The roadways are used simultaneously by passenger cars, trucks, buses, cyclists, pedestrians, etc. This creates a mixed traffic flow environment in which all the traffic participants share the available infrastructure. • No organized on-street marked parking • In efficient use of road capacity due to on street parking. Existing network pose a risk of severity from along and incoming traffic where, it can leads to the accidents • Deficiencies in PT and IPT system 1. Overcrowded Buses 2. Shortage of Buses 3. Huge Waiting Time 4. Lack of Bus Stops (Public Transport Accessibility) 5. Overaged and Small Buses 6. Overloaded Auto 7. Lack of IPT Stands 8. Lack of PT Routes 9. Traffic Congestion at Major Junctions

Lack of pedestrian facilities traffic conjunction Due to absence of footpath pedestrian are walking on the road leads to conjunction and safety issues, Lack of Cycle tracks conjunction happening, For terminal inadequate area for buses and passenger vehicles

PROJECTIONS

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR POPULATION PROJECTION POPULATION Projection methods 1. Arithmetical / Linear Method • A population growing arithmetically would increase by constant number of people in each period. The formula for such linear interpolation is Pn = P + n X C Where, P = present population, n= no. of decades , C = change in population 2. Geometrical Projection Method : Rateofgrowthwillbeconstant • In this method percentage increase in population from decade to decade is assumedtoremainconstant.Thepopulationattheendofnthdecadewillbe Pn =P(1+R/100)n Where,P=presentpopulation,n=no.ofdecades,R=Growthrate 3. Exponential Growth Method : • Exponential Growth refers to the situation where growth compounds continuouslyaddeveryinstant oftime.AlsocalledasInstantaneousgrowth method. Pn =Po.ert Where,Po =presentpopulation,t=duration,r =Growthrate,e=2.731 Inferences: 1. Geometric projection method is used to project the population, as it gives valuesclosetothecensus2011population. 2. Decadalgrowthis31.63%takentocalculationthepopulationforbaseyear 2021,2031and2041 Year Total Population Percentage 1911 40,529 18.89% 1921 48,184 35.27% 1931 65,179 28.26% 1941 83,599 49.83% 1951 1,25,255 49.39% 1961 1,87,122 44.29% 1971 2,69,991 36.19% 1981 3,67,699 28.11% 1991 4,71,051 9.22% 2001 5,14,461 52.07% 2011 7,82,354 31.63% 2021 1029813 31.63% 2031 1355542 31.63% 2041 1784300 • The population in the study area in 2011 as per census was 7,82,354. • The table below shows the population growth trend using the Geometricprojectionmethodinthestudyarea Growth trends – Geometric Projection Method 60.00%50.00%40.00%30.00%20.00%10.00%0.00% 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001 2011 2021 2031 2041 Growth rate(%) AKHIL-2200600049 ASHUTOSH-2200600038 138

7.Growth Rate is calculated by Multiplying PIA Ratio of district at particular year with Elasticity Value of that district

The traffic growth is seen as being dependent on certain economic and demographic indicators such as Population, Per Capita Income/Per Capita Net National Product etc. Usually this method lends more logic and dependability to the estimation process. Many different combinations of economic/demographic indicators such as population, Per Capita Income (PCI)/Per Capita Net National Product (PCNNP), total labor force (urban & rural), total employed population (urban & rural) etc. can be tried to bring out the best results but in this case, due to data availability constraints, a combination of two significant variables, namely Vehicle Registration data and Per Capita Income has been taken for analysis.

8.Gowth Factor of all district for all the prospective years are calculated. Average of Growth of all Districts in a year gives the Growth factor of that year

Methodology: ➢

▪

4.Take Slope of Log Value of Per Capita Income (2013-2019), Vehicular registration Data

5.Calculate PIA ratio by dividing CARG (2013- 2019) with average Andhra Pradesh State’s Growth Rate (2013-2019)

3.Calculate Log value of Vehicle registration data from 20132014 to 2018-2019

3. Time

TRAFFIC FORCASTING INTRODUCTION TO TRAFFIC FORECASTING & METHODOLOGY ASHUTOSH -2200600038 AKHIL -2200600049 140

6.Calculate PIA ratio for every 5 years

CARG ( 2011- 2019) are calculated

All projects relating to roads and highways need the fundamental input of traffic volume to be catered for by the facility Any forecast will be as good as the data that are used as input to the forecasting method and process. Thus, forecast cannot be considered to be totally accurate and forecasts for longer horizons need to be reviewed and revised with the progression of time using the available data progressively. Also, this is a function of the method used and disaggregation used in the forecasting process. Therefore, all designs, analysis and evaluation related to roads and highways shall require traffic forecasts as input. So much so, the economic and financial viability of projects are largely ruled by the traffic forecast. fundamentally different methods have been chosen for comparative analysis of the results. Trend Line Analysis Econometric analysis series analysis Analysis:

2.Calculate the log values of Per capita income. Log value

9. Trips of any year is calculated by multiplying the base year trip with Growth factor of that particular year.

➢

1.Per Capita Income at Constant price for all in PIA is taken from 2011-2012 to 2019-2020.CARG ( 2013- 2019) are calculated

Three

Econometric

▪

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Log e (P) = A0 + A1 Log e (EI) PWhere,=Traffic volume (of any vehicle type) EI= Economic Indicator (GDP/NSDP/Population/PCI) A0= Regression constant; A1= Regression co efficient (Elasticity Index)

▪

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Sl.No District Names of Andhra Pradesh state CAGR(2013 2019) Log CAGR(2013value2019) 1 Srikakulam 7.05% 0.62% 2 Vijayanagaram 6.59% 0.58% 3 Vishakhapatnam 9.83% 0.80% 4 East Godavari 9.15% 0.77% 5 West Godavari 8.99% 0.75% 6 krishna 14.17% 1.13% 7 Guntur 5.21% 0.45% 8 Prakasam 3.78% 0.33% 9 Sri potti Sriramulu Nellore 7.00% 0.59% 10 chittoor 8.01% 0.69% 11 Y.s.r. Cuddapah 6.79% 0.59% 12 Anantapur 7.08% 0.62% 13 Kurnool 4.61% 0.41% Overall 8.23% 0.70% Per Capita Income FinancialYear registrationVehicleData 2013 14 885385 2014 15 809832 2015 16 911526 2016 17 1024744 2017 18 1128527 2018 19 1258778 CAGR 7.29% Vehicle Registration Data Financial Year Log value of VehicleDataregistration 2013 14 13.69 2014 15 13.60 2015 16 13.72 2016 17 13.84 2017 18 13.94 2018 19 14.05 CAGR 0.51% Sl.No District Names ELASTICITY 1 Srikakulam 1.16 2 Vijayanagaram 1.07 3 vishakapatnam 0.81 4 East Godavari 0.84 5 West godavari 0.89 6 krishna 0.57 7 Guntur 1.43 8 Prakasam 1.53 9 Sri potti Sriramulu Nellore 0.91 10 chittoor 0.92 11 Y.s.r. Cuddapah 1.14 12 Anantapur 1.02 13 Kurnool 1.27 Overall 0.97 Elasticity value Year MultiplyingFactor 2007 1.069 2008 1.142 2009 1.221 2010 1.305 2011 1.394 2012 1.479 2013 1.568 2014 1.663 2015 1.763 2016 1.870 2017 1.995 2018 2.128 2019 2.271 2020 2.422 2021 (BASE YEAR) 2.585 TRAFFIC ECONOMETRICFORECASTINGANALYSIS Year MultiplyingFactor 2022 1.056 2023 1.114 2024 1.176 2025 1.242 2026 1.311 2027 1.378 2028 1.449 2029 1.524 2030 1.602 2031 1.685 2032 1.764 2033 1.847 2034 1.935 2035 2.026 2036 2.12 2037 2.21 2038 2.31 2039 2.41 2040 2.51 2041 (HORIZON YEAR) 2.62 Past Trends Extrapolation Future Forecast Econometric analysis – Growth rate Calculations Inferences (Past trends) : • Annual growth factor for past trends from 2006 to 2021 is 6.5%. • Multiplying factor for base year 2021 from 2006 is 2.585 Inferences (Future Forecast) : • Annual growth factor for Future Forecast from 2021 to 2041 is 4.9%. • Multiplying factor for Horizon year 2041 from 2021 is 2.62 CAGR (Compound annual growth rate): CAGR =(Ending balance/beginning balance)1/n - 1 EndingHere, balance is the value of the investment at the end of the investment period Beginning balance is the value of the investment at the beginning of the investment period N is the number of years you have invested ASHUTOSH -2200600038 AKHIL -2200600049 141

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Traffic Forecasting for Mid Block Points Location IDLocation Direction WidthCarriageway PCU)(inCapacity 2021 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 )Vehicle(InADTDirectional PCU)(InADTDirectional (In(ADT)TrafficDailyAverage Vehicle) PCU)(ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS PCU)(ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS PCU)(ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS PCU)(ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS PCU)(ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS GNT Road MB1 Guntur Chilakalurpetto 26.1 m 20000 19083 34855 3917 5 7065 4 5069 0.25 B 92628 6646 0.33 B 119052 8542 0.43 B 14992 8 10757 0.54 C 185043 13276 0.66 C MB1 Chilakalurpet to Guntur 20092 35799 GujjanagullaRoad MB2 Guntur to Palakalur 15.2m 5400 13679 10100 27358 20183 1564 0.29 B 26460 2050 0.38 B 34008 2635 0.49 C 42828 3319 0.61 C 52859 4096 0.76 C MB2 Palakalur to Guntur 13679 10083 TRAFFIC FORECASTING FOR MID BLOCK POINTS Limitations in Forecasting: • We have focused on total vehicle growth rate, individual vehicle type growth is not accounted. • We have taken total Guntur District Vehicle growth rate as city data is not available for desired year. Inference: • For GNT road traffic volume is greater than traffic capacity for the horizon year 2041. • For Gujjangulla road traffic Capacity is Sufficient for the horizon year. ASHUTOSH -2200600038 AKHIL -2200600049 142

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Traffic Forecasting for Outer Cordon Points Location IDLocation Direction WidthCarriageway PCU)(inCapacity 2021 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 )Vehicle(InADTDirectional PCU)(InADTDirectional (In(ADT)TrafficDailyAverage Vehicle) (ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCU) PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS (ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCU) PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS (ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCU) PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS (ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCU) PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS (ADT)(InTrafficDailyAverage PCU) PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS NH-16 OC1 IN 26.1 m 20000 35932 69971 76260 153097 9761 0.49 C 200710 12797 0.64 C 257968 16447 0.82 D 324871 20713 1.04 F 400960 25564 1.28 F OUT 40329 83126 Prattipadu Road OC2 IN 15.2 m 5400 12584 14130 27308 31196 2456 0.45 B 40898 3219 0.60 C 52565 4138 0.77 D 66197 5211 0.97 E 81702 6432 1.19 F OUT 14724 17066 Tenali OC3 IN 16 m 5400 22559 34556 36971 56854 5157 0.96 E 74536 6761 1.25 F 95800 8690 1.61 F 120645 10943 2.03 F 148902 13506 2.50 F OUT 14411 22298 GNT ChennaiNH OC4 IN 26.1 m 20000 24224 57563 47440 114011 7341 0.37 B 149469 9625 0.48 C 192109 12370 0.62 C 241932 15578 0.78 D 298596 19227 0.96 E OUT 23216 56449 Nandivelu OC5 IN 16 m 5400 7507 8696 14031 16167 1148 0.21 B 21194 1505 0.28 B 27241 1934 0.36 B 34306 2436 0.45 B 42340 3006 0.56 C OUT 6525 7471 Narsaraopeta OC6 IN 16.4 m 5400 22130 36229 45408 70097 4361 0.81 D 91898 5717 1.06 F 118114 7348 1.36 F 148747 9254 1.71 F 183585 11421 2.12 F OUT 23278 33869 AmaravatiRoad OC7 IN 15 m 5400 21528 25206 44302 47923 3836 0.71 C 62827 5029 0.93 E 80751 6464 1.20 F 101693 8140 1.51 F 125511 10047 1.86 F OUT 22774 22717 TRAFFIC FORECASTING FOR OUTER CORDON POINTS Inference: • All the Outer Cordon have traffic volume is greater than traffic capacity except for Nandivelu road for Horizon year 2041. ASHUTOSH -2200600038 AKHIL -2200600049 143

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Traffic Forecasting for Screen Line Points Traffic Forecasting For Screen line points Inference: • All the Screen Line points have traffic volume is greater than traffic capacity for both the base year 2021 and Horizon year 2041. • So these sections required immediate intervention. Location IDLocation Direction PCU)(inCapacity 2021 2021 2026 )Vehicle(InADTDirectional PCU)(InADTDirectional (ADT)TrafficDailyAverage Vehicle)(In TrafficDailyAverage PCU)(ADT)(In PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS TrafficDailyAverage PCU)(ADT)(In PCUHourPeak RatioV/C LOS Brodipet SL1 IN 2400 112034 89870 211798 167582 12672 2.35 F 219700 16613 3.08 F OUT 99764 77712 Muduvanthanallu SL2 IN 5400 60782 52434 115441 99185 7838 1.45 F 130032 10275 1.90 F OUT 54659 46752 Railway Crossing Sl3 IN 5400 41456 29017 105862 83496 7597 1.41 F 109463 9960 1.84 F OUT 64406 54479 Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 Location OC1 OC2 OC3 OC4 OC5 OC6 OC7 MB1 MB2 SL1 SL2 SL3 V/C Ratio 0.49 0.45 0.96 0.37 0.21 0.81 0.71 0.25 0.29 2.35 1.45 1.41 LOS C B E B B D C B B F F F Type CarriagewayPresentof 10 DividedLane 4 DividedLane 4 DividedLane 10 DividedLane 4 DividedLane 4 DividedLane 4 DividedLane 10 DividedLane 4 DividedLane 4 DividedLane 4 DividedLane 4 DividedLane Proposed carriageway for Base Year 10 Lane Divided 4 Lane Divided 6 Lane Divided 10 Lane Divided 4 Lane Divided 4 Lane Divided 4 Lane Divided 10 Lane Divided 4 Lane Divided 6 Lane Divided 6 Lane Divided 6 Lane Divided Inference: • LOS E & F of all the locations are required to intervene immediately. TVC points details for 2021 144

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N No.Sl. Intersection 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041 Peak Hour Traffic (PCU) Peak Hour Traffic (PCU) Peak Hour Traffic (PCU) Peak Hour Traffic (PCU) Peak Hour Traffic (PCU) Morning Evening Morning Evening Morning Evening Morning Evening Morning Evening 1 Chuttuguta 9601 9771 12587 12810 16177 16465 20373 20735 25144 25591 2 Ethurot Centre 11767 10785 15426 14139 19827 18172 24969 22885 30818 28245 3 GMC 1 15471 16875 20283 22123 26069 28434 32830 35808 40519 44195 4 GMC 2 20189 21973 26468 28806 34018 37024 42841 46626 52875 57546 5 Gujjanagundla junction 5279 4467 6920 5856 8894 7527 11201 9479 13825 11699 6 Jinnah tower 17149 17627 22482 23109 28896 29702 36390 37405 44913 46165 7 Lodge centre 16653 15414 21832 20208 28060 25973 35337 32709 43613 40370 8 BR Stadium 7202 7719 9442 10119 12135 13006 15282 16379 18862 20216 9 Maya bazar 7166 7698 9394 10092 12074 12971 15205 16335 18767 20161 10 Naaz centre 13744 15582 18019 20429 23159 26256 29166 33066 35997 40810 11 NTR stadium 7951 6889 10424 9032 13398 11608 16873 14619 20825 18042 12 NTR statue 7344 7370 9628 9662 12375 12418 15584 15639 19234 19302 13 Stambal Puram 2991 3808 3921 4992 5040 6416 6347 8080 7833 9972 14 Three statue junction 8391 6729 11000 8821 14139 11338 17806 14278 21976 17623 15 RTC junction 8851 9446 11604 12383 14914 15916 18782 20044 23181 24738 16 Bara Imam junction 3637 2999 4768 3931 6129 5053 7718 6363 9526 7853 Traffic Forecasting for TMC at Junction Points TRAFFIC FORECASTING AT TMC AT JUNCTION POINTS S.No Measures Existing 1 Unsignalized 5 2 Traffic calming measures 2 3 Roundabout 4 4 Signalized intersection 5 5 Req. Different measures 0 Inference: ▪ From the comparison of the existing traffic junction measures, 1 require traffic calming measures, 1 required roundabout and 6 required signalized junction ▪ 6 junctions are having Large number of PCU which requires different measures like Flyover, underpass or traffic diversion measures ▪ So these junctions are required immediate intervention. S.No PCU Measures Proposed 1 0 1000 Unsignalized 0 2 1000 3000 Traffic calming measures 1 3 3000 5000 Roundabout 1+1(existing) 4 5000 10000 Signalized intersection 6+1(existing) 5 10000+ Req. Different measures 6 ASHUTOSH -2200600038 AKHIL -2200600049 145

INTRODUCTION TO VARIOUS SCENERIOS AND HORIZON YEAR MODELING

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N INTRODUCTION TO VARIOUS SCENARIOS DENSIFICATION ALONG PT CORRIDORS VARIOUS SCENARIOS BUSINESS AS USUAL PROPOSAL BASED ON NTDPC AND GMC • Existing network • Modal share same as base year modal split • Production and Attraction (Trend base growth) • Existing TLFD curve • Trip Length Frequency Distribution (TLFD) curve • Production and attraction (Trend base growth) • Population distribution • Modal split (NTDPC guidelines) • Network (Proposed by GMC) • Network (Existing + proposed network by GMC + any extra link proposed in the study) • Max. caping density fixed at 250 pph • Additional density has been distributed among other TAZ’s • Distribution of Additional population to all TAZ’s • Additional production and attractions distribution • Modal split from sensitivity analysis, fuzzy based modal • Fixing certain corridors as Pedestrianized area E Mobility Reducing Carbon Emission through landscaping along the corridors SCENARIO - 1 SCENARIO - 2 SCENARIO - 3 Trip Production - 1761348 Trip Attraction - 1901582 POPULATION DESNITY MAP-2041 BUSINESS AS USUAL DENSIFICATION ALONG PT CORRIDORS PRANJAL-2200600047 146

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N BUSINESS AS USUAL SCENARIO POPULATION DENSITY MAP-2011 POPULATION DENSITY MAP-2021 LEGEND NOT TO SCALE NOT TO SCALE BAU SCENARIO LEGEND PRUDHVI-2200600048 147

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N POPULATIONLEGEND DESNITY MAP-2041 NOT TO SCALE 6000040000200000 80000 120000100000 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 TRIP ATTRACTIONS-2021 TAZ TRIP ATTRACTIONS-2021 200000 40000 1400001200001000008000060000 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 ADDITIONAL TRIPS FOR 2041 TAZ ADDITIONAL TRIPS-2041 0 25000020000015000010000050000 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49 51 53 TRIP ATTRACTIONS-2041 TAZ TRIP ATTRACTIONS -2041 SUMMARY From the density maps of the year 2011, 2021, 2041 it can be clearly inferred that in the Business as usual scenario the population has been increasing and the growth is towards North-West direction BAU SCENARIO BUSINESS AS USUAL SCENARIO PRUDHVI-2200600048 148

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TRIPLEGENDATTRACTIONS_2041 Total Population_2021 = 1029836 Total Population_2041 (BAU) = 1784324 Extra Population (2041 pop-2021 pop) =754488 BAU scenario Total Attractions for 2041 = 854874 BAU scenario Total Attractions including existing 2021 Attractions = 1901582 SUMMARY EXISTING TRIP ATTRACTIONS_2021 LEGEND BAU SCENARIO BUSINESS AS USUAL SCENARIO PRUDHVI-2200600048 149

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N TAZ 2021_POP BAU POPULATION2041 DIFFERENCE of 2041-2021 1 5185 11368 6183 2 24672 54092 29420 3 14464 31712 17248 4 11461 25127 13666 5 28628 62766 34138 6 37215 81594 44379 7 12075 26475 14400 8 45444 99635 54191 9 7443 16319 8876 10 15484 33949 18465 11 19997 43844 23847 12 24524 53768 29244 13 58844 129014 70170 14 21888 21888 0 15 22621 49596 26975 16 28099 61606 33507 17 14344 14344 0 18 24875 54537 29662 19 28915 63394 34479 20 14223 14223 0 21 11980 26266 14286 22 16579 16579 0 23 18988 41630 22642 24 11501 11501 0 25 21464 47059 25595 26 14273 14273 0 27 8604 8604 0 28 17113 37519 20406 29 14632 14632 0 30 13731 13731 0 31 19922 19922 0 32 15525 15525 0 33 21474 21474 0 34 15458 15458 0 35 10397 10397 0 36 15235 33402 18167 37 38828 38828 0 38 6660 6660 0 39 9141 9141 0 40 11684 11684 0 41 7512 7512 0 42 14640 14640 0 43 11424 11424 0 44 8852 8852 0 45 7106 15581 8475 46 11423 11423 0 47 15261 15261 0 48 17225 17225 0 49 5733 12569 6836 50 12259 12259 0 51 52842 115855 63013 52 49842 109279 59437 53 22457 49237 26780 54 19670 19670 0 POPULATIONTOTAL 1029836 1784324 754488 STEP-01: Per Capita Built-up area in 2021 = (Built-up area)/Taz Population Built-up area in 2041 = Increased Population*Per capita Built up area BuiltSTEP-02:-up area*attraction rates = Trip Attractions 2021 EXISTING GUNTUR BUILT UP USE AREA IN SQ.M NUMBERSTAZ COMMERCIAL PUBLIC & SEMI PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRIAL 1 41181 1329 0 37 2 45345 7920 0 39908 3 9590 529 0 59859 4 27509 6678 0 270 5 21303 10527 0 871 6 25262 21120 0 3761 7 41217 5405 862 7514 8 29603 10630 0 8804 9 92157 2038 0 205 10 137954 4039 0 11699 11 18243 714 0 9479 12 10623 1236 0 689 13 24426 5339 0 1974 14 3221 5123 0 127 15 2799 1695 0 198 16 64236 29951 559 1113 17 6389 255 0 119 18 5497 1136 0 30868 19 10829 3460 0 27092 20 5916 586 0 545 21 14292 21706 0 126 22 5471 1405 0 430 23 5262 3701 0 0 24 3322 1154 0 0 25 4601 3861 0 0 26 7549 4656 0 9 27 2410 794 0 173 28 35608 9934 0 12 29 39552 11273 0 146 30 53119 6672 0 0 31 10660 2716 0 16 32 10724 3294 0 67 33 5336 874 0 0 34 3856 776 0 0 35 1845 268 0 325 36 8052 1368 0 976 37 12278 23926 0 105 38 3437 614 0 0 39 4242 246 0 304 40 27568 3487 0 1059 41 4248 1857 0 0 42 26024 1607 0 624 43 50134 15624 0 364 44 13214 5057 0 0 45 43604 44217 11854 194 46 5300 560 0 233 47 5118 3052 0 68 48 11482 8432 0 35 49 3874 1103 0 0 50 20677 18950 0 193 51 29640 12492 0 1128 52 47633 30320 0 1742 53 6923 5448 0 0 54 28655 13875 0 192 AREA IN SQ.M 1179008 385030 13274 213651 AREA IN HECTARES 117.90 38.50 1.33 21.37 2041 TRIP ATTRACTIONS COMMERCIAL PUBLICPUBLICSEMI TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRIAL 0.78 0.29 0.84 0.02 38305 460 0 1 42177 2739 0 952 8920 183 0 1428 25585 2309 0 6 19814 3641 0 21 23498 7304 0 90 38339 1869 863 179 27535 3676 0 210 85718 705 0 5 128322 1397 0 279 16969 247 0 226 9881 427 0 16 22719 1846 0 47 0 0 0 0 2604 586 0 5 59747 10358 560 27 0 0 0 0 5113 393 0 736 10072 1197 0 646 0 0 0 0 13294 7506 0 3 0 0 0 0 4894 1280 0 0 0 0 0 0 4280 1335 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33119 3435 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7489 473 0 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40562 15293 11875 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3603 381 0 0 0 0 0 0 27570 4320 0 27 44306 10486 0 42 6439 1884 0 0 0 0 0 0 750873 85730 13298 4973 BAU FINAL ATTRACTIONS 854874 AreaSTEP-03:required for additional population = (Existing Built up area in 2021/population in 2021) * Increased Population COMMERCIAL PUBLIC & PUBLICSEMI TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRIAL 86.38 Ha 28.21 Ha 0.97 Ha 15.65 Ha morefreezed,14TAZs,17,22,24,26,27,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,37,3839,40,41,42,43,44,46,47,48,50,54werebecauseofpopulationdensitythan250personsperHaProcedurefollowedtocalculatetheattractionsandarearequiredforthe additional population BUSINESS AS USUAL SCENARIO BAU SCENARIO PRUDHVI-2200600048 150

TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR MODE CHOICE MODELLING Mode Choice Modelling using Fuzzy Logic(Horizon Year): Membership Functions: Travel Time Travel Cost Comfort Mode Development of Membership Function: SHASHANKMITRADEV-2200600044-2200600051 151

According to NTDPC (NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT POLICY COMMITTEE), the modal share for the city with population in between 1 Million to 2 Million should be as follows. Considering only the motorised trips the modal share should be as follows: To achieve this 38.46 % of PT ridership the Travel time needs to be reduced by 70% with a 10% increase in travel cost(Mode share: 37.53%) which is not practically possible.

SHASHANKMITRADEV-2200600044-2200600051

152

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N BAU 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – PT and IPT BAU 2041 Person Trips BAU 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Two-Wheelers BAU 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Cars BAU 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Total TOTAL TRIPS: 120146 MAX TRIPS: 33994 Avg TL: 10.62 km Avg TT: 40.14 mins TOTAL TRIPS: 73594 MAX TRIPS: 48584 Avg TL: 10.91 km Avg TT: 43.03 min TOTAL TRIPS: 973 MAX TRIPS: 1570 Avg TL : 10.01 km Avg TT : 40.87 min TOTAL TRIPS: 1946951 MAX TRIPS: 77340 Avg TL: 10.01 km Avg TT: 40.87 min DARSAN-2200600039 151

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N BAU 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – PT and IPT BAU 2041 Assignment PCU BAU 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – Two-Wheelers BAU 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – Cars BAU 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – Total MAX PCU: 17232 MAX PCU: 5616 MAX PCU: 1570 MAX PCU: 29509 DARSAN-2200600039 152

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N S2 ZDP 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – PT and IPT Scenario 2 - ZDP 2041 Person Trips S2 ZDP 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Two-Wheelers S2 ZDP 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Cars S2 ZDP 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Total TOTAL TRIPS: 86114 MAX TRIPS: 38366 TOTAL TRIPS: 93609 MAX TRIPS: 48954 TOTAL TRIPS: 14972 MAX TRIPS: 1511 TOTAL TRIPS: 194695 MAX TRIPS: 67258 DARSAN-2200600039 153

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ZDP 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – PT and IPT Scenario 2:ZDP 2041 PCU Assignment ZDP 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – Two-Wheelers ZDP 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – Cars ZDP 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – Total MAX TRIPS: 19445 MAX TRIPS: 5663 MAX TRIPS: 451 MAX TRIPS: 22140 DARSAN-2200600039 154

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NGURURAJA-2200600053 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION POPULATION REDISTRIBUTION ALONG MAJOR PT & IPT CORRIDORS OF HIGH PHPDT FOR 2041 1.2021 POPULATION DENSITY 2.FISHNET GRID 1 Ha X 1 Ha 3. MAJOR PHPDT PT & IPT CORRIDORS 7. PATH INFLUENCE5. DISTANCE FROM CORRIDORS 6. DISTANCE FROM CBD SCENARIO 3 155

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N 8.DENSITY DISTRIBUTION POPULATION DISTRIBUTION DERIVED POPULATION REDISTRIBUTION PATTERN FOR 2041 ALONG MAJOR PT & IPT CORRIDORS OF HIGH PHPDT DISTANCE FROM CORRIDOR METRES 250 500 1000 DISTANCECBDFROM 4000 100.0% 75.0% 50.0% 8000 75.0% 56.25% 37.50% 12000 50.0% 28.13% 18.75% Stretches 1,2,4,5,6,8 Max. Density 200 DISTANCE FROM CORRIDOR METRES 250 500 1000 DISTANCECBDFROM 4000 200 150 100 8000 150 113 75 12000 100 56 38 Stretches 3,9 Max. Density 150 DISTANCE FROM CORRIDOR METRES 250 500 1000 DISTANCECBDFROM 4000 150 113 75 8000 113 84 56 12000 75 42 28 Stretches 7 Max. Density 100 DISTANCE FROM CORRIDOR METRES 250 500 1000 DISTANCECBDFROM 4000 100 75 50 8000 75 56 38 12000 50 28 19 DETERMINING DENSITY GURURAJA-2200600053 156

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NPOPULATION DISTRIBUTION COMPARISION OF POPULATION DISTRIBUTION OF VARIOUS SCENARIOS 2021 POPULATION DENSITY BAU SCENARIO 2041 TAZ WISE POPULATION DENSITY OF REDENSIFICATION SCENARIO - 2041 GURURAJA-2200600053 157

urban transport system as well as the adjacent physical

relationships arising out of the urban form and its underlying

Transportation an influence on Urbanization has been shaped by simply Form is the spatial imprint of an infrastructures. confer a level of Structure is the set of mobility of

transport infrastructures, such as roads, transit systems or

Jointly, they

the urban spatial structure and shapes urbanization.

has

walkways Urban

spatial arrangement to cities. URBAN FORM URBAN STRUCTURE Urban

passengers and freight. TAZ Population(2021) Population(2041) BAU Attractions2041 RD Attractions2041 1 5785 8983 71273 45700 2 24671 42746 84331 39767 3 14464 25060 19362 60015 4 11460 19856 51300 59673 5 28627 49601 43162 181338 6 34081 64481 56796 92405 7 12075 20922 75841 78364 8 45444 78738 57770 30947 9 7443 12896 158905 141327 10 11563 20034 239007 183964 11 19997 34647 32068 24883 12 24524 42491 18983 14581 13 58844 101955 45253 74215 14 21888 37924 4001 4802 15 22621 39194 5874 34846 16 28098 48684 129973 91074 17 14343 24852 5060 5060 18 24874 43097 11476 11668 19 28914 50098 21906 19805 20 14223 24643 4795 4795 21 11980 20757 38248 22853 22 16778 28725 4683 4903 23 18987 32898 11351 9790 24 11501 19927 2926 2926 25 21464 37189 10324 23862 26 14474 24729 7238 7238 27 8604 14907 2114 3326 28 20112 29650 67209 53782 29 14631 25351 34122 40197 30 13731 23791 43367 43420 31 19922 34517 9103 10661 32 15525 26899 9321 20174 33 21473 37205 4415 4415 34 15458 26783 3232 16530 35 10396 18083 1523 1523 36 15234 26395 14683 12885 37 38828 67274 16517 41487 38 6659 15538 2859 2887 39 9141 15838 3386 14027 40 11684 20964 22536 23077 41 7512 13015 3852 4638 42 14640 25366 20777 21782 43 11424 19793 43643 43643 44 8852 15337 11774 11774 45 7106 12312 124529 56795 46 13423 19791 4301 4301 47 15763 26442 4879 5051 48 17225 29845 11402 11494 49 5783 10938 7327 6234 50 12259 21240 21628 22117 51 52842 91556 58681 55977 52 49842 86358 100814 57968 53 22957 39908 15303 13927 54 19670 34081 26378 26685 1029813 1784300 1901582 1901582 URBAN STRUCTURE QUANTIFICATION TECHNIQUES 1. Population Cumulative Distributions by Distance from Centre: Technique to measure the distribution of population according to increase in distance. City is divided into concentric rings and each ring is plotted with total population and attractions. Methods of Measurement: Coefficient of Dispersion 2. Lorenz Curve: Technique to represent amount of dispersion of population in a pictoral way. Is a graphical distribution of empirical probability distribution of wealth, income, population. Various zones/rings are ranked from high to low by population densities Methods Of Measurement: Factor of Locality Association & Radius of Dispersion QUANTIFICATION OF URBAN STRUCTURE VAISHNAVI-2200600036 159

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N QUANTIFICATION OF URBAN STRUCTURE Ring Area Population(2021) % Area Population% Area Population0 2 20 277623.7 14.60 26.96 12.36 2 4 56 516621.5 40.88 50.17 9.29 4 6 34 181279.1 24.82 17.60 7.21 6 8 17 29617.7 12.41 2.88 9.53 8 10 10 24671 7.30 2.40 4.90 137 1029813 100.00 100.00 43.30 Ring Area Population(2041) % Area % Population Area Population0 2 20 518460.7 14.60 29.06 14.46 2 4 56 814461.885 40.88 45.65 4.77 4 6 34 204722.6 24.82 11.47 13.34 6 8 17 202262.1 12.41 11.34 1.07 8 10 10 44392.3 7.30 2.49 4.81 137 1784300 100.00 100.00 38.46 Coefficient of Dispersion Is a method of measuring spatial distribution of Apopulation.=Xi – Yi/2 Xi = % Area Yi = % Population Low Value of A depicts even distribution of Population while high value depicts unequal Locality Association Factor Measure of degree of similarity or difference between distribution of parameters L/A = (100 (Xi Yi))/2 Xi = % Attractions Yi = % Population Higher value depicts higher degree of association Coefficient of Dispersion: 21.65 Coefficient of Dispersion: 19.23 Change in Spatial Distribution, B = 1.13 Rings % Area Population% % Attractions(BAU) Attractions - Population 0 2 14.60 23.83 23.50 0.32 2 4 40.88 46.45 41.88 4.57 4 6 24.82 21.54 19.84 1.69 6 8 12.41 4.87 9.32 4.44 8 10 7.30 3.31 5.45 2.14 100.00 100.00 100.00 13.17 Rings % Area Population% % Attractions(RD) Attractions Population 0 2 14.60 29.79 21.77 8.02 2 4 40.88 42.91 37.20 5.71 4 6 24.82 15.21 28.73 13.52 6 8 12.41 8.81 8.62 0.19 8 10 7.30 3.28 3.69 0.40 100.00 100.00 100.00 27.84 Locality Association Factor L/A: 43.42 Locality Association Factor L/A : 36.08 Radius of Dispersion Measure of change in population over the range due to either increase or decrease in Usedpopulation.toquantify change over period of time Rings Population%(2021) % Attractions(BAU) Attractions%(RD) 0 2 26.99 23.83 29.79 2 4 50.58 46.45 42.91 4 6 17.16 21.54 15.21 6 8 2.85 4.87 8.81 8 10 2.42 3.31 3.28 23.83 46.45 21.54 4.87 3.31 29.79 42.91 15.21 8.81 3.28100.0090.0080.0070.0060.0050.0040.0030.0020.0010.000.00 0--2 2--4 4--6 6--8 8--10 % Population (2021) % Attractions (BAU) % Attractions (RD) QUANTIFICATION OF URBAN STRUCTURE VAISHNAVI-2200600036 160

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NLANDUSE PROJECTIONS EMPLOYMENT GENERATING LANDUSE PREDICTION BASED ON MCDM TECHNIQUE FOR 2041 : 2021 LANDUSE EXISTING EMPLOYMENT GENERATING LANDUSES AVAILABLE NON-RESIDENTIAL VACANT PLOTS WITHIN 250 Mtrs ALONG PT CORRIDORS 2021 POPULATION 1029836 2041 PREDICTED POPULATION 1784324 ADDITIONAL POPULATION 754488 LANDUSEExistingPREDICTION:PerCapita Land utilisation AdditionalrequiredLanduse Landuse sq.metres sq.mtrs Ha Commercial 1.28 962656 96.27 Industrial 0.33 248653 24.87 Public - Semi Public 0.39 295619 29.56 Transport Facilities 0.02 15831 1.58 TotalRequiredLand 152.28Ha MCDM – CRITERIA FOR LANDUSE DISTRIBUTION LANDUSE CRITERIA 1 Commercial Within 250metres proximity to PT & IPT Routes Non Residential vacant Land having area less than 1 Ha 2 Industrial Within 250metres proximity to PT & IPT Routes 200 mtrs. Proximity to existing industrial buildings Non Residential vacant Land having area less than 2 Ha 500 Metres from Residential Lands & Water Bodies 3 Publicpublicsemi- Within 250metres proximity to PT & IPT Routes Non Residential vacant Land having minimum 1 Ha area 4 Transport Facility 1 hectare facility need to be proposed Based on PT group recommendations 175 Ha Available GURURAJA-2200600053 161

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Amaravati TRIP ATTRACTION PROJECTIONS LANDUSE PREDICTION FOR 2041 ❑ TAZ wise additional built up area (Employment generating landuse) is multiplied with employment rates taken from Eluru CMP in the absence of establishment survey data. ❑ Employment rates per sq. meter is mentioned in the above table and additional Built up proposed TAZ wise is multiplied to derive Trip attractions CATEGORY Area(ha.) ATTRACTIONSATTRACTIONRATES&ADDITIONALDERIVED Share% COMMERCIAL 96.27 0.78 750873 88% PUBLICPUBLICSEMI 29.56 0.29 85730 10% TRANSPORTATION 1.58 0.84 13298 2% INDUSTRIAL 24.87 0.02 4793 1% TOTAL PROPOSED NEW LANDUSE 152.3 854874 PROPOSED LANDUSES & DETERMINING TRIP ATTRACTION RATES FOR REDENSIFICATION SCENARIO - 2041 GURURAJA-2200600053 162

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NFUTURE TRIP ATTRACTION RATES COMPARISION OF TRIP ATTRACTION RATES OF ALL SCENARIOS BASE YEAR TRIP ATTRACTIONS 2021 BAU SCENARIO 2041 REDENSIFICATION SCENARIO - 2041 ADDITIONAL TRIPS – BAU SCENARIO 2041 ADDITIONAL TRIPS – REDENSIFICATION SCENARIO 2041 BAU SCENARIO ADDITIONAL TRIPS BASE YEAR REDENSIFICATIONTRIPS SCENARIO ADDITIONAL TRIPS BASE YEAR TRIPS GURURAJA-2200600053 163

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NTRIP ATTRACTION WRT BUILT-UP AREA 2021 ATTRACTITRIPONS ADDITIONAL BUILT UP INCREASE (Sq.mtrs) ATTRACTIONADDITIONALTRIPS ATTRACTITOTALONSTAZ COMMER CIAL PUBLIC SEMI PUBLIC TRANSPORTA TION INDUSTR IAL 32 9321 13914 0 0 0 10852 20173 33 4415 0 0 0 0 0 4415 34 3232 0 0 15831 0 13298 16530 35 1523 0 0 0 0 0 1523 36 6696 7933 0 0 0 6188 12884 37 16517 26518 14778 0 0 24969 41486 38 2858 37 0 0 0 29 2887 39 3386 7458 16633 0 0 10641 14027 40 22535 695 0 0 0 542 23077 41 3852 1007 0 0 0 786 4638 42 20777 1289 0 0 0 1005 21782 43 43642 0 0 0 0 0 43642 44 11773 0 0 0 0 0 11773 45 56794 0 0 0 0 0 56794 46 4301 0 0 0 0 0 4301 47 4878 222 0 0 0 173 5051 48 11401 118 0 0 0 93 11494 49 3341 3708 0 0 0 2893 6234 50 21627 628 0 0 0 490 22117 51 26764 37452 0 0 0 29213 55977 52 45981 15368 0 0 0 11987 57968 53 6979 8907 0 0 0 6947 13926 54 26378 393 0 0 0 306 26684 1046682 962658 295619 15831 248653 854874 1901582 2021 ATTRACTITRIPONS ADDITIONAL BUILT UP INCREASE (Sq.mtrs) ATTRACTIONADDITIONALTRIPS ATTRACTITOTALONSTAZ COMMERCIAL PUBLICPUBLICSEMI TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRIAL 1 32507 16915 0 0 0 13193 45700 2 38464 0 0 0 65124 1302 39766 3 8831 64616 0 0 39185 51184 60015 4 23398 46505 0 0 0 36274 59672 5 19686 165797 110524 0 13875 161652 181338 6 25904 76641 23175 0 0 66501 92405 7 34590 48347 17190 0 53857 43774 78364 8 26349 5895 0 0 0 4598 30947 9 72477 76353 32047 0 0 68849 141326 10 109009 96095 0 0 0 74954 183963 11 14626 12796 0 0 13798 10257 24883 12 8658 7592 0 0 0 5922 14580 13 20640 62533 16549 0 0 53575 74215 14 4000 1028 0 0 0 802 4802 15 2679 41240 0 0 0 32166 34845 16 59281 26550 38221 0 0 31793 91074 17 5059 0 0 0 0 0 5059 18 5234 6638 0 0 62814 6434 11668 19 9991 12581 0 0 0 9813 19804 20 4795 0 0 0 0 0 4795 21 17445 1968 13352 0 0 5407 22852 22 4682 282 0 0 0 220 4902 23 5177 5913 0 0 0 4612 9789 24 2925 0 0 0 0 0 2925 25 4708 24555 0 0 0 19153 23861 26 7238 0 0 0 0 0 7238 27 2113 1554 0 0 0 1213 3326 28 30654 24761 13149 0 0 23128 53782 29 34122 7788 0 0 0 6074 40196 30 43367 68 0 0 0 53 43420 31 9102 1998 0 0 0 1559 10661 ANNEXURE – TAZ WISE ADDITIONAL BUILT UP AREA PROPOSED & DERIVED TRIP ATTRACTION GURURAJA-2200600053 164

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N HANSEN ACCESSIBILITY INDEX FOR DENSIFICATION SCENARIO (2041) and BAU SCENARIO(2041) It is defined as: INFERENCE The normalized Hansen integral accessibility index for the road densification scenario shows an increased accessibility in terms of opportunities and spatial separation. The comparison of Hansen accessibility index evaluated for the BAU scenario as well a s densification scenario helps to understand how densification scenario improved the accessibility to opportunity. Fig : Hansen accessibility index for BAU scenario 2041 Fig : Hansen accessibility index for Densification scenario 2041 HAYCELIN-2200600040 HANSEN ACCESSIBILITY INDEX & BAU 165

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N RDS 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – PT and IPT Scenario 3 - RDS 2041 Person Trips RDS 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Two-Wheelers RDS 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Cars RDS 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour Trips – Total TOTAL TRIPS: 124137 MAX TRIPS: 27805 TOTAL TRIPS: 36,001 MAX TRIPS: 40299 TOTAL TRIPS: 973 MAX TRIPS: 1352 TOTAL TRIPS: 95250 MAX TRIPS: 82356 DARSHAN-2200600039 166

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N RDS 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – PT and IPT Scenario 3: RDS 2041 PCU Assignment RDS 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – Two-Wheelers RDS 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – Cars RDS 2041 Mode-wise Peak Hour PCU – Total MAX TRAFFIC: 14092 MAX TRAFFIC: 4659 MAX TRAFFIC: 404 MAX TRAFFIC: 15814 DARSHAN-2200600039 167

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N HORIZON SCENARIOS V/C COMPARISONHORIZON YEAR MODELLING TVCLocationSurvey Type locationSurveyof Directional Combined/ Capacity B. ObservedYrVolume ObservedB.Yr.V/C ModelledB.Yr.Volume ModelledB.Yr.V/C BAU Volume2041(S1) BAU (S1) 2041 V/C ZDP Volume2041(S2) ZDP 2041(S2)V/C RDS Volume2041(S3) RDS 2041(S3)V/C 1 OC Inward 2700 335 0.12 446 0.17 696 0.26 822 0.30 459 0.17 2 OC Inward 2700 908 0.34 774 0.29 802 0.30 1049 0.39 3540 1.31 3 MB Combined 5400 3485 0.65 3847 0.46 16531 3.06 16937 3.14 13566 2.51 4 MB Combined 5400 6491 1.20 6536 1.21 14868 2.75 18249 3.38 14910 2.76 5 MB Combined 5400 3636 0.67 1956 0.36 10757 1.99 8336 1.54 7446 1.38 6 OC Inward 1200 201 0.17 556 0.46 611 0.51 611 0.51 483 0.40 Scenario 1: BAU 2041 V/C RatioBase Year 2021 V/C Ratio 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 & Above DARSAN-2200600039 168

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NHORIZON YEAR MODELLING TVCLocationSurvey Type locationSurveyof Directional Combined/ Capacity B. ObservedYrVolume ObservedB.Yr.V/C ModelledB.Yr.Volume ModelledB.Yr.V/C BAU Volume2041(S1) BAU (S1) 2041 V/C ZDP Volume2041(S2) ZDP 2041(S2)V/C RDS Volume2041(S3) RDS 2041(S3)V/C 1 OC Inward 2700 335 0.12 446 0.17 696 0.26 822 0.30 459 0.17 2 OC Inward 2700 908 0.34 774 0.29 802 0.30 1049 0.39 3540 1.31 3 MB Combined 5400 3485 0.65 3847 0.46 16531 3.06 16937 3.14 13566 2.51 4 MB Combined 5400 6491 1.20 6536 1.21 14868 2.75 18249 3.38 14910 2.76 5 MB Combined 5400 3636 0.67 1956 0.36 10757 1.99 8336 1.54 7446 1.38 6 OC Inward 1200 201 0.17 556 0.46 611 0.51 611 0.51 483 0.40 Scenario 3: RDS 2041 V/C RatioScenario 2: ZDP V/C Ratio 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 HORIZON SCENARIOS V/C COMPARISON & Above DARSAN-2200600039 169

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N 170 HORIZON SCENARIOS HORIZON YEAR MODELLING Scenario 1 BAU 2041 Mode Share Share 2w 37.80 37.80 IPT 34.14 41.91IPT Fixed 3 seater 5.33 IPT Fixed 6 seater 2.44 Bus APSRTC 6.66 19.80 Bus PVT 13.14 Car 0.50 0.50 TOTAL 100 100 Scenario 2 ZDP 2041 (NTDPC) Mode Share Share 2w 48.08 48.08 IPT 4.70 5.77IPT Fixed 3 seater 0.73 IPT Fixed 6 seater 0.34 Bus APSRTC 12.93 38.46 Bus PVT 25.53 Car 7.69 7.69 TOTAL 100 RDS Scenario Mode Share Share 2w 35.75 35.75 IPT 32.10 39.41IPT Fixed 3 seater 5.01 IPT Fixed 6 seater 2.29 Bus APSRTC 8.19 24.35 Bus PVT 16.16 Car 0.50 0.5 TOTAL 100.01 Attribute Base Year Scenario 1 BAU Scenario 2 ZDP Scenario 3 RDS Population 1029836 1784324 1784324 1784324 Network Length (Km) 454 454 454 480 Passenger Demand 952500 1946951 1946951 1946951 Public Demand (PT + IPT) 587730 1201460 861140 1241370 Private Demand 364770 582864 1085811 706581 Average Trip Length (Km) 9.05 10.02 10.49 9.95 Average Trip Time (min) 25 40.87 27.72 35.45 Passenger Km 8248242 20895119 29232445 19684057 Vehicle Km 3087853 8317182 10862400 7966124 Mode Base Year 2021 BAU 2041 ZDP RDS 2041 Over All Avg Trip Time 17.80 40.87 40.37 35.45 Avg Trip Length 7.14 10.02 10.49 9.95 Car Avg Trip Time 18.58 40.87 27.72 35.45 Avg Trip Length 7.14 10.02 10.49 9.95 Two Wheeler Avg Trip Time 18.87 43.03 41.79 35.77 Avg Trip Length 7.29 10.91 11.29 10.90 IPT Non Fixed Avg Trip Time 36.49 43.05 41.81 35.78 Avg Trip Length 10.73 10.87 11.04 10.66 IPT Fixed Avg Trip Time 28.13 36.86 39.89 33.57 Avg Trip Length 9.35 11.24 12.59 9.20 PuT Bus Avg Trip Time 33.05 36.42 37.54 34.53 Avg Trip Length 9.30 9.96 10.26 9.24 Scenario 1 : Business As Usual (BAU 2041) Scenario considers same Mode split as in Base year 2021 with no network change Scenario 2 considers Zonal Development Plan Proposals with NTDPC recommended Mode Split while trip ends remains same as in BAU 2041. Scenario 3 considers Road Densification Scenario (RDS 2041) where selected corridors are densified and new PT/IPT routes proposed 38% 42% 20% 0% Scn 1 Mode Split 2W IPT Bus Car 48% 6% 38% 8% Scn 2 Mode Split 2W IPT Bus Car 36%24%39%1% Scn 3 Mode Split 2W IPT Bus Car DARSAN-2200600039

HORIZON YEAR PT MODELING

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL PT Assignment – Transit Lines BRTS Assessment – Base year 2021 ▪ Red Transit Line : • NTR Bus Stand Peddakakani Town • Distance 7.40 kms • Various modes such as APSRTC Bus, Pvt Mini Bus & IPT 7 seater auto are serving the route • Route serves majorly for the semi urban patronages • Potential scope for BRTS implementation. ▪ Blue Transit Line : • NTR Bus Stand SVN colony, via Koritipadu • Distance 6.5 kms • Route covers major city portion • Completely urban Patronage • Various modes serving the Line mini Pvt Buses & Autos • Commercial Abutting land uses ▪ Green Transit Line : • PVK Market Pattabhipuram, via Collector Office Road • Distance – 5 kms Transit Line Type No of routes Routes codes Section Load PPHPD Base year 2021 (Persons Trips) Remarks (Up-Line) (Down-Line) Red 7 GBRT01,PVBRT02/05/06,IPTRT01/02/11 3174 2052 ▪ Blue transit line is close to 4000 Standard.PPHPD ▪ BRTS seems to be viable from Base year 2021 Blue 7 GBRT07, IPTRT08/09PVBRT15/23/24/27, 3398 3819 Green 3 IPTRT16/17/18 2448 1599 Total 17 0 9020 Prepared7470 by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 171

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL PT Assignment – BAU Scenario (2041)-PPHPD ➢ For the BAU 2041 Scenario – The peak PT Volume of section Loads are observed with 13000 (PPHPD) Person Trips near Jinnah Tower Center, Guntur Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 172

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL PT Assignment – BAU Scenario (2041)-PPHPD MODELLED BAU-2041 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN -LINE RIDERSHIP ROUTECODE VEHICLE TYPE ROUTE DETAILS CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD GBRT01 APSRTC BUS Guntur Vijayawada (Via Peddakakani) 15,249 3,665 46,983 3,636 GBRT02 APSRTC BUS Guntur Nandivelugu ( Via Uppalapadu) 4,120 1,147 6,851 3,063 GBRT03 APSRTC BUS Guntur Tenali (via Narakoduru) 8,478 801 3,110 321 GBRT04 APSRTC BUS Guntur Prathipadu (Via Etukuru) 1,028 154 3,026 329 GBRT05 APSRTC BUS Guntur Chilakaluripeta (via chowdavaram) 14,669 1,383 25,206 1,982 GBRT06 APSRTC BUS Guntur Perecherla (Via ChuttuGunta & Nallapadu) 55,191 5,800 89,556 8,122 GBRT07 APSRTC BUS Guntur Amaravthi (Via Lodge center) 3,605 418 2,114 240 Total 1,02,340 13,368 1,76,846 17,693 MODELLED BAU-2041 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN -LINE RIDERSHIP ROUTECODE VEHICLE TYPE ROUTE DETAILS CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD CORRIDOR PPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD PVBRT02 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Kakani Temple 488 203 8 5 PVBRT03 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Gundavaram 20 6 18 6 PVBRT05 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Kanteru 454 162 7 4 PVBRT06 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Namburu 567 203 8 5 PVBRT07 MINI PVT BUS PVK Naidu Market Yanamadala 27 5 526 158 PVBRT12 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Station Yanamadala 158 31 168 27 PVBRT13 MINI PVT BUS PVK Naidu Market Kornepadu 27 9 54 24 PVBRT15 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand SVN Colony (Via koritipadu) 32,803 2,659 75,263 4,602 PVBRT23 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand SVN Colony (Via pattabhipuram) 342 81 2,486 398 PVBRT24 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand Gorantla (Via lodge Center) 560 74 893 119 PVBRT27 MINI PVT BUS NTR Bus Stand SVN Colony (Via lakshmipuram Main Road) 7,687 1,751 4,348 661 Total 43,132 5,184 83,780 6,010 Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 173

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL PT Assignment – BAU Scenario (2041)-PPHPD MODELLED BAU-2041 PPHPD (PERSON TRIPS) UP-LINE RIDERSHIP DOWN-LINE RIDERSHIP ROUTECODE VEHICLE TYPE ROUTE DETAILS CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD CORRIDORPPHPD SECTIONPPHPDLOAD IPTRT01 AUTO 3 SEATER NTR Bus stand Namburu Via Auto nagar & NH 16 11,454 2,480 2,054 367 IPTRT02 AUTO 3 SEATER NTR Bus stand Mangalagiri Via Auto nagar & NH 16 15,555 2,213 1,178 184 IPTRT03 AUTO 3 SEATER NTR Bus stand Tenali Via Narakoduru 33,204 2,374 13,660 1,022 IPTRT04 AUTO 3 SEATER GNT market Prathipadu Via Etukuru 2,873 1,089 12,670 1,381 IPTRT05 AUTO 3 SEATER GNT market Edlapadu Via Chowdavaram 5,383 538 21,202 2,371 IPTRT06 AUTO 3 SEATER Lodge Center Lam Via Gorantla 6,389 1,011 1,191 159 IPTRT07 AUTO-3 SEATER Reliance Bunk Gorantla Via Guntur Inner Ring Road 0 0 1 1 IPTRT08 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Gujjanagundla circle Via Koritipadu 2,218 270 625 109 IPTRT09 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand --Gujjanagundla circle Via lakshmi Puram 3,577 331 2,130 272 IPTRT10 AUTO-7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Guntur Railway Station Via Nazz Center 7,128 1,993 1,872 388 IPTRT11 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Gaddipadu old NH 5 3,668 770 346 91 IPTRT12 AUTO-7 SEATER NTR Bus stand --Manipuram old NH-5 200 75 409 132 IPTRT13 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Old Guntur Via Balaji Nagar 164 128 173 121 IPTRT14 AUTO 7 SEATER BR Stadium IDP Colony Via Gangi Bazar 273 64 602 158 IPTRT15 AUTO 7 SEATER NTR Bus stand Naidupeta Via Donka Road 7,607 850 1,981 412 IPTRT16 AUTO 7 SEATER Ramesh Hospital Pattabipuram Via Collector Office Road 18,427 5,877 15,283 3,811 IPTRT17 AUTO-7 SEATER PVK Market --AT Agraharam Via Nagarampalem 114 40 393 169 IPTRT18 AUTO 7 SEATER PVK Market APHB colony Via Nagarampalem 1,380 582 7,595 2,374 Total 1,19,615 20,683 83,365 13,520 Prepared by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 174

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PT ASSIGNMENT MODEL PT Assignment – Transit Lines BRTS Assessment – BAU 2041 ▪ Red Transit Line : • NTR Bus Stand Peddakakani Town • Distance 7.40 kms • Various modes such as APSRTC Bus, Pvt Mini Bus & IPT 7 seater auto are serving the route • Route serves majorly for the semi urban patronages • Potential scope for BRTS implementation. ▪ Blue Transit Line : • NTR Bus Stand SVN colony, via Koritipadu • Distance 6.5 kms • Route covers major city portion • Completely urban Patronage • Various modes serving the Line mini Pvt Buses & Autos • Commercial Abutting land uses ▪ Green Transit Line : • PVK Market Pattabhipuram, via Collector Office Road • Distance – 5 kms Transit Line Type No of routes Routes codes Section Load PPHPD Base year 2021 (Persons Trips) Remarks (Up-Line) (Down-Line) Red 7 GBRT01,PVBRT02/05/06,IPTRT01/02/11 9,695 4,292 ▪ By 2041 all the Transit lines are qualified for BRTS as the section load ridership crossing 4000 PPHPD Standard. Blue 7 GBRT07, IPTRT08/09PVBRT15/23/24/27, 5,584 6,401 Green 3 IPTRT16/17/18 6,499 Prepared6,354 by : MADHU KIRAN TAYI REG NO -2200600042 175

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NPT and IPT Issues and Challenges PT AND IPT ISSUES AND CHALLENGES Less availability of PT Buses Less Bus Frequency and Bus Fleet Improper and Less Bus Stops (Public Transport Accessibility) Over aged and Small Buses Lack of Proper IPT Stands No Fixed Route for IPT Overloaded IPT Services Public Transport Accessibility Level Transit Access Area Improper Bus StopOverloaded Bus due to less frequency No Proper IPT Stands V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 176

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Prepared by: ENVIRONMENT & SAFETY GROUP ABHIJIT SAHANI 2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K 2200600052 NAMBURI KRUSHNA BHUSHAN 2200600045 PROPOSALS PROPOSALS FOR EFFICIENT TRAFFIC CONTROL • Signalizing the intersections identified in Guntur city for improvement. • Flyover and underpass near screen line points FOR IMPROVEMNET OF AQI OF THE GUNTUR • Plantation and landscaping along the road stretches as per green highway mission • Implementation of E mobility FOR PROVIDING SAFETY FOR ROAD USERS • Safety barriers on medians • Pedestrian crossing facilities with refuge • Motor cycle lanes without barrier separation PARKING IMPROVEMENT PROPOSALS PARKING PROPOSALS (CITY LEVEL) City Level Proposals For Additional Parking Area Demand Ecs/100 Sqmt Smart Parking Management System – To Provide Surveillance Camera, Real Time Occupancy Measurement And Wi Fi Facilities Etc. PARKING PROPOSALS (AREA LEVEL) TAZ 29,40,42,43 1 Safe Parking Shaded parking Implement off street parking charges 2 PedestrianConnectivitywalkways and IPT connectivity from off street parking location to major commercial places. 3 FineStrategyforon-street parking. Public awareness and hoardings. Restricting for 4 wheelers at peak hours PROPOSALS FOR IMPROVING PT & IPT 1. Proposed Public Transport Routes (30.7 kms) 2. Proposed Bus Stops (70) 3. Proposed BRTS corridor 4. Proposed Multimodal integration (IPT, PT and NMT) 5. Proposed IPT Routes 6. ITS integration with Public Transport 7. EV Infrastructure PROPOSALS FOR NMT • Proposed fob, crossing/signalzebracontrolled for predestrian, footpath for predistan safety, cycle tracks to improve nmt and avoid traffic conjunction Road NetworkPROPOSALSDevelopment • Road widening of the internal major roads • Radial Ring road 177

PT & IPT PROPOSALS

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Towards Chilakaluripeta VijayawadaTowardsTowardsBapatla PT Proposals BASE YEAR TRIP ATTRACTIONS AND BASE YEAR PHPDT ▪ Base year Trip Attractions of TAZ and Route wise total PHPDT were considered for Short term PT Route Proposals. ▪ In the base year scenario, High Trip Attractions can be observed in TAZ-10 and then TAZ-9 ▪ High PHPDT is Observed on Road Stretch from PVK Market towards Chilakaluripeta, SVN Colony, Gorantla and Vijayawada V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 178

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Towards Chilakaluripeta TowardsTowardsVijayawadaBapatla PROPOSED PUBLIC TRANSPORT ROUTES (SHORT TERM) PT Proposals ▪ Three types of Public Transport Services are proposed. ▪ BRTs Service ▪ Express Bus Service ▪ Normal Bus Service ▪ These PT bus types are considered based on the PHPDT, Trip Attractions and Landuse of TAZ. ▪ Route from Intra City Terminal to SVN Colony is extended till Perecherla. Bus Type Route Length BRTS ServiceBus Intra City Terminal to Yanamadala 18 km Express Bus Service PVK to SVN Colony, Gorantla, Kantheru 36 km Normal Bus Services All other Routes 144 km Bus Type PHPDT BRTS ServiceBus More8000than Express Bus Service 40008000to Normal Bus Service Upto 4000 PHPDT Values and Bus Service type Proposed Bus Type on Routes V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 179

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Towards Chilakaluripeta Towards VijayawadaTowardsBapatlaBASE YEAR BUS STOPS (SHORT TERM) PT Proposals ▪ Based on the Trip Attractions of TAZ, new PT Bus Stops are located. ▪ Existing Bus Stops are Improved ▪ These PT Bus Stops are proposed at a distance ranging from 500mt to 800mt. (Max Walking Distance 400mt). V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 180

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ChilakaluripetaTowards VijayawadaTowardsTowardsBapatla HORIZON YEAR TRIP ATTARCTIONS WITH HORIZON YEAR PHPDT PT Proposals ▪ Horizon year Trip Attractions of TAZ and Route wise total PHPDT were considered for long term PT Route Proposals. ▪ In the Horizon year RDS scenario, High Trip Attractions can be observed in TAZ- 5, 6, 9, 10 ▪ High PHPDT is Observed on Road Stretch towards Chilakaluripeta, Perecherla, Gorantla, Vijayawada and Budampadu. V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 181

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ChilakaluripetaTowards VijayawadaTowardsTowardsBapatlaLam HORIZON YEAR PUBLIC TRANSPORT ROUTES PT Proposals ▪ Frequency of BRTs, Express Bus Service is increased on the routes with high PHPDT. TypeBus Route Length BRTS ServiceBus Intra City Terminal toBudampaduSVNYanamadala,Colony,Gorantla, 46 km Express ServiceBus PVK to Perecherla, SVN Colony, Lam , KornepaduKantheru, 105 km ServiceBusNormal All other Routes 192 km Proposed Bus Type on Routes Proposed Route Route Length New Route – N1 Intra City Terminal to Yanamadala Via Lodge Center, Pedapalakaluru 26 km New Route N2 NTR to Perecherla 14 km Extended Route 24/1 NTR Bus Stand to Lam 12 km V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 182

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N EXISTING ROAD CROSS SECTION (WITHOUT BRT) PROPOSED ROAD CROSS SECTION (WITH BRT) PT Proposals ANIMESH - 2200600037 183

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ChilakaluripetaTowards Towards Vijayawada TowardsBapatla HORIZON YEAR BUS STOPS (LONG TERM- 2041) PT Proposals ▪ Based on the Horizon year Trip Attractions of TAZ and the new PT Routes, new PT Bus Stops are located. ▪ These PT Bus Stops are proposed at a distance ranging from 500mt to 800mt. (Max Walking Distance 400mt). ▪ The travel time in BRTs and Express bus will be less. Bus Type Average Speed BRTS Bus Service 40 kmph Express Bus Service 30 kmph Normal Bus Service 25 kmph Average Speed of Buses BRTS Bus Service Normal Bus Service Express Bus Service V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 184

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Proposed Public Transport Route Details PT Proposals Category Route No FleetRouteper Way(Min)Head Total(km)Length ExistingRoutes 2 13 12 7.8 3 46 3 13 5 35 4 20.5 6 21 7 12.3 7 57 3 16.6 12 62 3 18 13 102 2 10 15 25 6 7.5 23 155 1 7.6 24 26 6 7.6 27 27 6 8 ExtendedRoutes 3/1 19 8 5.5 5/1 23 7 13.4 15/1 37 4 11 24/1 41 4 12 ProposedRoute N1 88 2 25.8 N2 34 5 10 Route Origin Destination 2 Guntur Old Bus stand Kakani Temple 3 Gundavaram 5 Kanteru 6 Namburu 7 PVK Market Yanamadala 12 Intra City Terminal Yanamadala 13 PVK Market Kornepadu 15 Intra City Terminal SVN Colony, via Koritipadu 23 SVN Colony, via Pattabipuram 24 Gorantla 27 SVN Colony via lakshmipuram 3/1 Old Bus stand Budampadu 5/1 Kantheru 15/1 Intra City Terminal Perecherla 24/1 Lam Bus Stop N1 Intra City Terminal Yanamadala Via Pedapalakaluru N2 PVK Market Perecherla Proposed PT Route Map ▪ New Intra City Bus Terminal was proposed to cater all intra city Bus service. It serves around 309 Buses during peak hour. ▪ This terminal deviates 210 Bus Which are supposed to be originated from NTR Bus Stand. This reduces Bus traffic on PVK Market Road. V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 MITRADEV - 2200600044 185

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N KEY LEGENDPLAN Administration Block Terminal BusFECCirculationWorkshop2/ParkingParking Parking ProposedWaterGreenerytankarea SCALE NOT TO SCALE BusProposedparking area OTHERPROPERTY Area distribution of bus station --- sq.m FEC / Parking 7774.10 Bus Parking ( 120 buses) 32101.31 Parking 1,404.39 Greenery 11,368.13 1. 3.2.4. 5. Terminal 2 Unauthorized Car Parking Service roads Overhead water tank Zebra CirculationcrossingspaceBusbaysinternimal-1 SITE PLAN FEC / Parking PROPOSED BUS TERMINAL PHASE – 1 AREADISTRIBUTION PHASE 2 PROPOSAL Area distribution of bus station --- sq.m Total area 1,50,000 Administration BlockWorkshop 5,600 Bus Parking 78,600 Greenery 10% Circulation 15% INFERENCE Area distribution of bus station --- sq.m Administration Block 4951.10 Terminal 2 block 968.82 Workshop 2500 Circulation 5632.31 BUS TERMINAL Phase 1 proposal workshop area increased ( 17 buses ) Proposed FEC and parking area Proposed bus parking area for 120 buses in phase 1 Phase 2 proposal Area for new terminal as been demarcated Distance between existing and proposed bus terminal 2.4km MANOJ.S - 2200600043 186

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Fleet Estimation & requirement for PT: FLEET ESTIMATION & REQUIREMENT- PT SL NO. PUBLIC TRANSPORT CHARACTERISTICS 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041BACK CALCULATION 1Total Trips 9,52,504 12,00,000 15,00,000 17,00,000 19,01,584 9,52,504 2Public Transport Share 19.80% 19.80% 19.80% 24.35% 24.35% 19.80% 3Estimated Public Transport Ridership 188596 237600 297000 413950 463036 188596 4Average Passenger Trip Length (in kms) 10.91 10.91 10.91 9.23 9.23 10.91 5Daily Public Transport Demand 2057580 2592216 3240270 3820759 4273820 2057580 6Vehicle Utilization (in km) 125 127 129 133 135 125 7Load Factor 173.36% 100.00% 85.00% 75.00% 65.00% 173.36% 8Passenger Capacity per Vehicle 45 48 50 55 60 45 9Public Transport Supply for Bus 9751.5 6096 5483 5486 5265 9751.6 10Fleet Utilization 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100% 11Number of Buses Required 211 425 591 696 812 211.00 SL.NO BUS FLEET 2021 2021-2026 2026-2031 2031-2036 2036-2041 1Existing Fleet 211 211 425 591 696 2Percentage of Buses Overaged 50% 50% 25% 54% 39% 3Number of Buses Overaged 106 106 106 320 272 4New Buses Required 106 320 272 425 387 5Total No of Buses 211 425 591 696 812 * ASSUMING LIFE SPAN OF EACH BUS AS 10 YEARS By ownershipYear 2021 2021-2026 2026-2031 2031-2036 2036-2041 PVT. 30% 63 127 176 208 242 GOVT. 70% 148 298 415 488 569 100% 211 425 591 696 812 OveragedYearBuses 2021 2021-2026 2026-2031 2031-2036 2036-2041 PVT. 30% 32 32 32 96 82 GOVT. 70% 74 74 74 224 190 106 106 106 320 272 Electric BusesYear 2021 2021-2026 2026-2031 2031-2036 2036-2041 PVT. 0 63 132 208 242 GOVT. 74 298 415 488 569 74 362 547 696 812 New BusesYear 2021 2021-2026 2026-2031 2031-2036 2036-2041 PVT. 30% 32 96 82 128 116 GOVT. 70% 74 224 190 298 271 106 320 272 425 387 MITRADEV - 2200600044 187

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Fleet Distribution For PT: FLEET DISTRIBUTION FOR PT Fleet Estimation & requirement for IPT: SL NO. IPT CHARACTERISTICS 2021 2026 2031 2036 2041BACK CALCULATION 1Total Trips 9,52,504 12,00,000 15,00,000 17,00,000 19,01,584 9,52,504 2IPT Share 41.91% 41.91% 41.91% 39.41% 39.41% 41.91% 3Estimated IPT Ridership 399194 502920 628650 669970 749414 399194 4 Average Passenger Trip Length (in kms) 8.95 9 9.25 9.5 9.93 8.95 5Daily IPT Demand 3572790 4526280 5815013 6364715 7441684 3572790 6Vehicle Utilization (in km) 78.1 80 85 90 100 78.1 7Load Factor 587.62% 400.00% 200.00% 175.00% 150.00% 587.62% 8 Passenger Capacity per Vehicle 4.5 5 5 6 6 4.5 9IPT Supply 2065.19 1600 850 945 900 2065.20 10Fleet Utilization 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100% 11Number of Autos Required 1730 2829 6841 6735 8269 1730.00 3572790.1 4526280 5815012.5 6364715 7441683.5 3572790 SL.NO BUS FLEET 2021 2021-2026 2026-2031 2031-2036 2036-2041 1Existing Fleet 1730 1730 2829 6841 6735 2Percentage of Autos Overaged 30% 50% 12% 8% 29% 3Number of Autos Overaged 519 865 346 519 1964 4New Autos Required 519 1964 4358 413 3497 5Total No of Autos 1730 2829 6841 6735 8269 ElectricYearAutos 2021 2021-2026 2026-2031 2031-2036 2036-2041 AUTO 0 2263 6841 6735 8269 No of Buses Line Route Nos PHPDTMaximum % of Total PHPDT 2041 12,5,6,5/1 31364 11.44% 93 215,24,27,15/1,N1 82356 30.04% 244 3 23 52267 19.06% 155 47,12,N2 51691 18.85% 153 5 13 34426 12.56% 102 6 3 22081 8.05% 65 274185 100.00% 812 RouteNo No Buses/RouteOf Link No of Buses Way(Mints)Head Dist. PeakBusesHr. Existing No Of Buses 2 13 1 93 12 7.8 5 4 5 35 4 20.5 13 3 6 21 7 12.3 8 4 5/1 23 7 13.4 9 15 25 2 244 6 7.5 10 24 24 26 6 7.6 10 2 24/1 41 4 12 1527 27 6 8 10 12 15/1 37 4 11 14N1 88 2 25.8 33 23 155 3 155 1 7.6 59 1 7 57 4 153 3 16.6 22 6 12 62 3 18 24 2 N2 34 5 10 1313 102 5 102 2 10 39 4 3 46 6 65 3 13 17 1 3/1 19 8 5.5 7 Route wise fleet distribution: Link wise fleet distribution: MITRADEV - 2200600044 188

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Bus Scheduling Information for Route no-02 and N1 Route no-02 Bus Scheduling Travel Time 0:19 No of Fleet 0:05 Head Way 0:12 Origin (A) NTR Bus Stand Total layover time 0:22 Destination (B) Kakani Temple Layover @ end 1 0:11 Layover @ end 2 0:11 Bus No. A B Layover @ 1 Bus No. B A Layover @ 2 1 5:30 5:49 6:00 4 5:36 5:55 6:06 2 5:42 6:01 6:12 5 5:48 6:07 6:18 3 5:54 6:13 6:24 1 6:00 6:19 6:30 4 6:06 6:25 6:36 2 6:12 6:31 6:42 5 6:18 6:37 6:48 3 6:24 6:43 6:54 1 6:30 6:49 7:00 4 6:36 6:55 7:06 2 6:42 7:01 7:12 5 6:48 7:07 7:18 3 6:54 7:13 7:24 1 7:00 7:19 7:30 4 7:06 7:25 7:36 2 7:12 7:31 7:42 5 7:18 7:37 7:48 3 7:24 7:43 7:54 1 7:30 7:49 8:00 4 7:36 7:55 8:06 2 7:42 8:01 8:12 5 7:48 8:07 8:18 3 7:54 8:13 8:24 1 8:00 8:19 8:30 4 8:06 8:25 8:36 2 8:12 8:31 8:42 5 8:18 8:37 8:48 3 8:24 8:43 8:54 1 8:30 8:49 9:00 4 8:36 8:55 9:06 2 8:42 9:01 9:12 5 8:48 9:07 9:18 3 8:54 9:13 9:24 1 9:00 9:19 9:30 4 9:06 9:25 9:36 2 9:12 9:31 9:42 5 9:18 9:37 9:48 3 9:24 9:43 9:54 1 9:30 9:49 10:00 4 9:36 9:55 10:06 2 9:42 10:01 10:12 5 9:48 10:07 10:18 3 9:54 10:13 10:24 1 10:00 10:19 10:30 4 10:06 10:25 10:36 2 10:12 10:31 10:42 5 10:18 10:37 10:48 3 10:24 10:43 10:54 1 10:30 10:49 11:00 4 10:36 10:55 11:06 Route no-N2 Bus Scheduling Travel Time 0:25 No of Fleet 0:14 Headway 0:5 Origin (A) PVK Market Total layover time 0:20 Destination (B) Perecherla Layover @ end 1 0:10 Layover @ end 2 0:10 Bus no. A B Layover @ 1 Bus no. B A Layover @ 2 1 5:05 5:30 5:40 10 5:15 5:40 5:50 2 5:10 5:35 5:45 11 5:20 5:45 5:55 3 5:15 5:40 5:50 12 5:25 5:50 6:00 4 5:20 5:45 5:55 13 5:30 5:55 6:05 5 5:25 5:50 6:00 14 5:35 6:00 6:10 6 5:30 5:55 6:05 1 5:40 6:05 6:15 7 5:35 6:00 6:10 2 5:45 6:10 6:20 8 5:40 6:05 6:15 3 5:50 6:15 6:25 9 5:45 6:10 6:20 4 5:55 6:20 6:30 10 5:50 6:15 6:25 5 6:00 6:25 6:35 11 5:55 6:20 6:30 6 6:05 6:30 6:40 12 6:00 6:25 6:35 7 6:10 6:35 6:45 13 6:05 6:30 6:40 8 6:15 6:40 6:50 14 6:10 6:35 6:45 9 6:20 6:45 6:55 1 6:15 6:40 6:50 10 6:25 6:50 7:00 2 6:20 6:45 6:55 11 6:30 6:55 7:05 3 6:25 6:50 7:00 12 6:35 7:00 7:10 4 6:30 6:55 7:05 13 6:40 7:05 7:15 5 6:35 7:00 7:10 14 6:45 7:10 7:20 6 6:40 7:05 7:15 1 6:50 7:15 7:25 7 6:45 7:10 7:20 2 6:55 7:20 7:30 8 6:50 7:15 7:25 3 7:00 7:25 7:35 9 6:55 7:20 7:30 4 7:05 7:30 7:40 10 7:00 7:25 7:35 5 7:10 7:35 7:45 11 7:05 7:30 7:40 6 7:15 7:40 7:50 12 7:10 7:35 7:45 7 7:20 7:45 7:55 13 7:15 7:40 7:50 8 7:25 7:50 8:00 14 7:20 7:45 7:55 9 7:30 7:55 8:05 BUS SCHEDULING- ROUTE 02 & N1 V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 189

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N NTR Bus standMB Center Shankar Villas PVK market PROPOSED INTERMEDIATE PUBLIC TRANSPORT ROUTES IPT Proposals ▪ New IPT Routes are Proposed on the areas with no public transport facility. ▪ Routes having very less PHPDT that is less than 2000 were provided with IPT Service so that trips from that route can be served. ▪ IPT Routes From Guntur to Uppalapadu, Perecherla, Peda Palakaluru and Some routes which don’t have public transport are provided with IPT Services. ▪ Auto Stands at the Origin and Destination of every Routes is proposed. ▪ Important IPT Locations ▪ MB Center ▪ Shankar Villas (Railway Station) ▪ PVK market ▪ NTR Bus stand 3 Seater Auto 6 Seater Auto ▪ These Locations are identified has high potential areas for IPT Services ▪ These locations connects areas where PT services is not available. V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 190

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PROPOSED INTERMEDIATE PUBLIC TRANSPORT STANDS AND EV STATIONS Proposed IPT Stands And EV Stations V.BHARGAVA – 2200600054 ANIMESH - 2200600037 191

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N SL.NO TRANSPORTATION ISSUES ITS SOLUTION EFFECTIVENESS 01 Bus timings are not available for all the routes (and at all bus stops) ▪ Interactive Kiosks ▪ Scheduling and Despatch Software It will keep the passengers well informed regarding the exact timing and position of buses 02 Fare and route details ▪ Interactive Kiosks ▪ Automated Trip Itineraries Convenient ticketing and travel information 03 Real time vehicle location and tracking ▪ Automatic Vehicle Locator ▪ GPS It will provide data to the service providers to scrutinise the bus movement and to pinpoint its location to deal with delays and emergency situations 05 Station details (while travelling) ▪ In vehicle information It will improve passenger awareness and ease of travelling 06 Nearest bus stop information ▪ Passenger Information System It will provide travel information to the passengers 07 Bus ticketing issues ▪ Electronic Fare Collection To reduce congestion and to save time in ticketing 08 Incident Detection ▪ Automatic Vehicle Locator ▪ GPS To pinpoint locations of accident or vehicle breakdown SOLUTION OF TRANSPORTATION ISSUES THROUGH INTELLIGENT TRAFFIC SYSTEM Intelligent Traffic System Proposal ANIMESH - 2200600037 192

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NIntelligent Traffic System Proposals 3D MODEL OF INTELLEGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEM PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF BUS STOP PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF IPT STAND AND EV CHARGING STATION PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF INTERMODAL INTEGRATION PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF TRAFFIC SERVILLENCE CAMERA ANIMESH - 2200600037 193

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N WORKING OF INTELLIGENT TRAFFIC SYSTEM TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ACQUISITIONDATA PROCESSINGDATA INFORMATIONDISTRIBUTION INFORMATIONUTILIZATION INTELLIGENT TRAFFIC SYSTEM USER Working of ITS ANIMESH - 2200600037 194

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N FARE MANAGEMENT ELECTRONIC FARE COLLECTION ARCHITECTURE AUTOMATIC FARE COLLECTION DEPO MANAGEMENT REPORTS AND ANALYTICS FRAMEWORK OF ELECTRONIC FARE COLLECTION SYSTEM Electronic Fare Collection Architecture ANIMESH - 2200600037 195

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PASSENGER INFORMATION SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE Passenger Information System Architecture ANIMESH - 2200600037 196

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PROPOSED BUS STOPS WITH INTELLIGENT TRAFFIC SYSTEM Proposed Bus Stops With ITS ANIMESH - 2200600037 197

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a No of Buses available in a city on any day No. 812 b Total Population of the city No. 1784300 c Availability of Public transport 1000 population Ratio 0.455 Los Range Observation 1 >=0.6 Availability of PT/1000 people is around 0.421 which comes under LOS 2. Supply has Improved. 2 0.4-0.6 3 0.2 0.4 4 <0.2 No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Total length in road kms of the corridors on which public transport systems ply in the city Km. 116.39 b Area of the urban limits of the city Sq. Km 139.138 c Service Coverage (a/b) Km./Sq. km 0.836 Extent of Supply / Availability of Public Transport System: Service Coverage of Public Transport in the City: Los Range Observation 1 >=1 The observed service coverage is 0.836 which comes under LOS 2. Which represents that the coverage has improved with new routes. 2 0.7-1.0 3 0.3 0.7 4 <0.3 Transit Access Area --(Percentage built up area within 500m of PT running) No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a PT corridor length (500m buffer on either side) Sq. Km. 99.433 b Total developed area Sq. Km. 139.138 c Transit access area = (a/b)*100 % 71.46 Los Range Observation 1 >=80 The transit access area is 71.46% of total area which comes under LOS 2. Which represents transit access area has improved with new routes. 2 60-80 3 40 60 4 <40 LOS for Public Transport: SLB- HORIZON YEAR (PT) MITRADEV - 2200600044 198

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Average trip length in the city. Km. 9.23 b Average trip cost Rs. 25.37 Minimum wage in the country Rs. 10836 c Total expenditure on transportation = ((fare /km)* Average trip length))*52 1319.24 d Affordability (Total expenditure on transportation/total Monthly income) *100 % 12.174 Affordability: Los Range Observation 1 <=10 The expenditure on travel is around 12.174% of monthly income which falls under LOS 2 . Affordability has increased over time. 2 11-14 3 14 20 4 >20 Transit Access Area --(Percentage built up area within 500m of PT Parameterrunning) Base Year SLB Horizon Year SLB Impact Supply 3 2 Coverage 3 2 AccessTransitarea 3 2 Affordability 3 2 SLB- HORIZON YEAR (PT) MITRADEV - 2200600044 199

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a No of IPT available in a city on any day No. 7659 b Total Population of the city No. 1784300 c Availability of IPT 1000 population Ratio 4.29 Los Range Observation 1 >=8 The no of IPT/1000 people coms out to be 4.29. It comes under LOS 3. Availability has increased over time. 2 6-8 3 4-6 4 <=4 No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Total length in road kms of the corridors on which IPT systems runs in the city Km. 148.85 b Area of the urban limits of the city Sq. Km 139.138 c Service Coverage (a/b) Km./Sq. km 1.069 Extent of Supply / Availability of Public Transport System: Service Coverage of Public Transport in the City: Los Range Observation 1 >=1 The service coverage of IPT network is 1.069 which comes under LOS 1 which represents IPT coverage has improved & now satisfactory. 2 0.7 1.0 3 0.3 0.7 4 <0.3 LOS for Intermediate Para Transport: No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Travel time by IPT Minutes 34.67 b Travel time by 2W Minutes 35.76 c Travel time ratio Ratio 0.969 Los Range Observation 1 <=1 Travel time ratio is 0.969 which comes under LOS 1. Overall travel time by IPT has improved.2 1.0 1.25 3 1.25 1.5 4 >1.5 Travel time ratio: SLB- HORIZON YEAR (IPT) MITRADEV - 2200600044 200

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Los Range Observation 1 >=20 The average travel speed is 17.184 kmph which comes under LOS 3. Speed has reduced over time. 2 18 20 3 16-18 4 <16 No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Average trip length in the city. Km. 9.93 b Average trip cost Rs. 15.405 Minimum wage in the country Rs. 9030 c Total expenditure on transportation = ((fare /km)* Average trip length))*52 801.06 d (TotalAffordabilityexpenditure on transportation/total Monthly income) *100 % 8.87 Travel Speed: No.Sl. Data required for calculating the indicator Unit Value a Avg. Distance covered from Origin to destination Km. 9.93 b Avg. Travel time Minutes 34.67 c Travel speed Km/Hr 17.184 Affordability: Los Range Observation 1 <=10 For IPT users the it costs 8.87% of their income for travel expenditure. Affordability has improved over time. 2 11 14 3 14 20 4 >20 Parameter Base Year SLB Horizon Year SLB Impact Supply 4 3 Coverage 3 1 Travel time ratio 4 1 SpeedTravel 1 3 Affordability 2 1 SLB- HORIZON YEAR (IPT) MITRADEV - 2200600044 201

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Public Transport accessibility Level: Legend Bus Stop Bus Route PUBLIC TRANSPORT ACCESSIBILITY LEVEL

MITRADEV - 2200600044 202

Inference: Public transport accessibility has been observed to be improved in the core part of the city. Improvements has been observed in the zone no 4, 13, 16, 43, 44, 45, 46, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 36 etc. & the major accessibility improvement has been observed in zone 43 where the NTR bus stop is situated.

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Financial Analysis: FINANCIAL ANALYSIS Estimation of Capital Cost Road developmentway Bus stop ITS Controlcentre Fleet Terminal InfrastructureEVConstruction2031(87%)2024(13%)Phase Fleet2041(19.2%)2031(17.5%)2026(27.6%)2024(35.6%)Augmentation Operation & Maintains charges Repair & Spare: Bus Stop Tyre & tube Spare Parts Battery replacement Staff Calculation( For Additional AdminWorkshopCrewFleet)&Account Fuel StaffConsumptionCostRepair Estimation of revenue ATL* Ridership* AdvertisementAnnualRevenue/dayFareearning@3%Net revenue= total revenue – total cost Total cost = Capital cost + O & M cost Economic Saving Travel time saving Value of HealthCongestionSaving Net Saving: Economic SavingEconomic Cost Financial Analysis Economic Analysis MITRADEV - 2200600044 203

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NFINANCIAL ANALYSIS- CAPITAL COST Capital Cost Phasing Cost/unit(Crore)-2021 Unit Total(Crore)Cost CostCapitalusedin2023 CostCapitalusedin2024 CostCapitalusedin2025 usedCapitalCostin2026 CostCapitalusedin2031 CostCapitalusedin2036 LandedProjectCost Roadway development (Rs/Km) 13.46 30.7 413.36 467.51 64.6 904.6 2811.00 Bus Stop (No.) 0.98 70 68.60 97.41 31.1 29.7 31.85 28.16 ITS application and External Tracking (LS) 11.56 1 11.56 16.42 5.6 5.3 5.37 4.75 Control Center (No.) 23.00 1 23.00 32.66 8.7 9.2 26.70 Fleet (No.) 1.28 421 537.20 762.82 289 254.8 218.9 325.7 New Bus Terminal 252.00 1 252.00 357.84 433.0 Total 1305.71 1734.65 393.51 44.55 693.07 1187.37 358.64 Contingencies 65.29 86.73 19.68 2.23 34.65 59.37 17.93 Grand Total 1371.00 1821.38 413.18 46.78 727.72 1246.74 376.57 Electric vehicle Cost/unit(Crore)2021 Unit Total(Crore)Cost CostCapitalusedin2023 CostCapitalusedin2024 CostCapitalusedin2025 usedCapitalCostin2026 CostCapitalusedin2031 CostCapitalusedin2036 LandedProjectCost Roadway development (Rs/Km) 13.46 30.7 413.36 467.51 64.6 904.6 3322.51 Bus Stop (No.) 0.98 70 68.60 97.41 31.1 29.7 31.85 28.16 ITS application and External Tracking (LS) 11.56 1 11.56 16.42 5.6 5.3 5.37 4.75 Control Center (No.) 23.00 1 23.00 32.66 8.7 9.2 26.70 Fleet (No.) 1.83 421 770.43 1094.01 415 365.4 313.9 467.2 New Bus Terminal 252.00 1 252.00 357.84 433.0 EV Charging Fascility 0.30 28 8.26 11.73 3.7 3.6 3.84 3.39 Total 1547.21 2077.57 522.79 48.13 803.67 1286.24 503.45 Contingencies 77.36 103.88 26.14 2.41 40.18 64.31 25.17 Grand Total 1624.57 2181.45 548.93 50.54 843.86 1350.56 528.62 Capital Cost: Inference: Capital Cost requirement for Electric vehicle is higher as compared to ICE vehicle. RoadwaySource: development cost, Bus stop: ADB estimates ITS application: Ahmedabad tmicc Terminal: Estimates from cuttack bus terminal MITRADEV - 2200600044 204

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Repair and Maintenance Cost 2012 2026 2031 2036 2041 Bus Stops (No.) 0.02 1.40 0 2.56 8.62 15.23 Tyres & Tubes (rate/km) 1.08 2.02 15.05 28.51 45.64 72.34 Spare Parts (rate/km) 1.07 2.02 14.91 28.25 45.22 71.67 Total 29.96 59.32 99.48 159.23 Misc @2% 0.60 1.19 1.99 3.18 30.56 60.51 101.47 162.41 Staff Calculation Component Staff/bus AdditionalFleet AdditionalStaffreq2026 AdditionalStaffreq2031 AdditionalStaffreq2036 lAdditionaStaffreq2041 Traffic 3.5 421 525 410 256 284 Workshop 1 421 150 117 73 81 Admin and account 0.5 421 75 59 37 41 750 585 365 405 Total Staff 740 1490 1325 1105 1145 O/M cost Calculation O/M cost Unit cost/unit 2026 2031 2036 2041 Fuel Consumption 16.98 136.37 258.34 412.98 654.99 Staff Cost 17.45 140.15 265.49 424.41 673.12 Repair and maintenance 5.03 40.40 76.53 122.34 194.03 316.91 600.35 959.72 1522.13 347.48 660.86 1061.19 1684.54 Repair and Maintenance Cost 2012 2026 2031 2036 2041 Bus Stops (No.) 0.02 1.40 0 2.56 8.62 15.23 Tyres & Tubes (rate/km) 1.08 15.05 28.51 45.64 72.34 Battery Replacement 4.48 35.98 68.16 108.96 172.81 Total 51.03 99.23 163.23 260.37 Misc @2% 1.02 1.98 3.26 5.21 52.05 101.22 166.49 265.58 Staff Calculation Component Staff/bus AdditionalFleet AdditionalStaffreq2026 AdditionalStaffreq2031 AdditionalStaffreq2036 lAdditionaStaffreq2041 Traffic 3.5 421 525 410 256 284 Workshop 1 421 150 117 73 81 Admin and account 0.5 421 75 59 37 41 750 585 365 405 Total Staff 740 1490 1325 1105 1145 O/M cost Calculation O/M cost Unit cost/unit 2026 2031 2036 2041 Fuel Consumption 4.43 35.58 67.40 107.74 170.88 Staff Cost 17.45 140.15 265.49 424.41 673.12 175.72 332.89 532.15 844.00 227.78 434.10 698.64 1109.58 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS- O & M COST ICE Vehicle Electric Vehicle: Revenue Generation Earning from fare 2026 2031 2036 2041 2046 Daily ridership 188596 237600 297000 413950 463036 673153 Fare 20 27 36 49 67 91 Daily earning 0.37 0.63 1.07 2.03 3.09 6.10 Fare Box Earnings 134.37 230.23 391.47 741.75 1128.60 2226.93 Advertisement revenue @3% 4.03 6.91 11.74 22.25 33.86 66.81 Total revenue 237.13 403.22 764.00 1162.46 2293.73 Revenue Generation: Inference: O & M cost is more for ICE vehicle as compared to EV. MaintainsSource: cost, Battery replacement cost, Fuel cost Staff cost:, WRI India MITRADEV - 2200600044 205

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NFINANCIAL ANALYSIS- ICE VEHICLE Year Cost Revenue Net benefitsCapital cost ReplacementofBuses O & M Cost Total cost Ridership Fare Fare Box Advertise ment ValueScrapofBus Total revenue 2024 413.18 0.00 413.18 188596 413.18 2025 46.78 46.78 199817 46.78 2026 727.72 347.48 1075.20 211707 27 208.64 6.26 214.90 860.30 2027 0.00 347.48 347.48 224303 29 234.98 7.05 242.03 105.45 2028 0.00 347.48 347.48 237649 31 264.64 7.94 272.58 74.89 2029 0.00 347.48 347.48 251789 32 298.05 8.94 306.99 40.48 2030 0.00 347.48 347.48 266771 34 335.68 10.07 345.75 -1.72 2031 1246.743 528.19 660.86 2435.79 282644 37 378.06 11.34 389.40 -2046.39 2032 0.00 660.86 660.86 299461 39 425.79 12.77 438.56 -222.29 2033 0.00 660.86 660.86 317279 41 479.55 14.39 493.93 166.93 2034 0.00 660.86 660.86 336157 44 540.09 16.20 556.29 104.57 2035 0.00 660.86 660.86 356158 47 608.27 18.25 626.52 34.34 2036 376.5712 608.08 1061.19 2045.84 377350 50 685.07 20.55 109.16 814.78 1231.06 2037 0.00 1061.19 1061.19 399802 53 771.56 23.15 794.70 266.49 2038 0.00 1061.19 1061.19 423590 56 868.96 26.07 895.03 166.16 2039 0.00 1061.19 1061.19 448794 60 978.67 29.36 1008.03 53.16 2040 0.00 1061.19 1061.19 475497 64 1102.22 33.07 1135.29 74.10 2041 0.00 1684.54 1684.54 503789 68 1241.38 37.24 187.01 1465.63 -218.91 2042 0.00 1684.54 1684.54 533765 72 1398.10 41.94 1440.04 -244.49 2043 0.00 1684.54 1684.54 565524 76 1574.61 47.24 1621.85 62.69 2044 0.00 1684.54 1684.54 599172 81 1773.40 53.20 1826.60 142.06 2045 0.00 1684.54 1684.54 634823 86 1997.29 59.92 2057.21 372.67 2046 0.00 1522.13 1522.13 672595 92 2249.45 67.48 56.49 2373.41 851.29 IRR 12.04% NPV (INR 38.60) MITRADEV - 2200600044 206

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Year Cost Revenue Net benefitsCapitalcost ReplacementofBuses O & CostM Total cost Ridership Fare Fare Box Advertisement ValueScrapofBus revenueTotal 2024 548.93 0.00 548.93 188596 548.93 2025 50.54 50.54 199817 -50.54 2026 843.86 227.78 1071.63 211707 27 208.64 6.26 214.90 856.74 2027 0.00 227.78 227.78 224303 29 234.98 7.05 242.03 14.25 2028 0.00 227.78 227.78 237649 31 264.64 7.94 272.58 44.81 2029 0.00 227.78 227.78 251789 32 298.05 8.94 306.99 79.22 2030 0.00 227.78 227.78 266771 34 335.68 10.07 345.75 117.98 2031 1350.56 755.15 434.10 2539.81 282644 37 378.06 11.34 389.40 2150.40 2032 0.00 434.10 434.10 299461 39 425.79 12.77 438.56 4.46 2033 0.00 434.10 434.10 317279 41 479.55 14.39 493.93 59.83 2034 0.00 434.10 434.10 336157 44 540.09 16.20 556.29 122.19 2035 0.00 434.10 434.10 356158 47 608.27 18.25 626.52 192.42 2036 528.62 869.36 698.64 2096.62 377350 50 685.07 20.55 126.58 832.20 1264.43 2037 0.00 698.64 698.64 399802 53 771.56 23.15 794.70 96.06 2038 0.00 698.64 698.64 423590 56 868.96 26.07 895.03 196.39 2039 0.00 698.64 698.64 448794 60 978.67 29.36 1008.03 309.39 2040 0.00 698.64 698.64 475497 64 1102.22 33.07 1135.29 436.65 2041 0.00 1109.58 1109.58 503789 68 1241.38 37.24 202.58 1481.20 371.63 2042 0.00 1109.58 1109.58 533765 72 1398.10 41.94 1440.04 330.47 2043 0.00 1109.58 1109.58 565524 76 1574.61 47.24 1621.85 512.27 2044 0.00 1109.58 1109.58 599172 81 1773.40 53.20 1826.60 717.03 2045 0.00 1109.58 1109.58 634823 86 1997.29 59.92 2057.21 947.63 2046 0.00 844.00 844.00 672595 92 2249.45 67.48 79.29 2396.22 1552.23 IRR 1.96% NPV (INR 50.96) FINANCIAL ANALYSIS- EV Inference: Financially EV in public transport is more suitable as compared to ICE vehicle. Financially is EV is profitable with an IRR of 1.96% where as ICE is not profitable with IRR of -12.04%. MITRADEV - 2200600044 207

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N KEY LEGENDPLAN Administration Block Terminal BusFECCirculationWorkshop2/ParkingParking Parking ProposedWaterGreenerytankarea SCALE NOT TO SCALE BusProposedparking area OTHERPROPERTY Area distribution of bus station --- sq.m FEC / Parking 7774.10 Bus Parking ( 120 buses) 32101.31 Parking 1,404.39 Greenery 11,368.13 1. 3.2.4. 5. Terminal 2 Unauthorized Car Parking Service roads Overhead water tank Zebra CirculationcrossingspaceBusbaysinternimal-1 SITE PLAN FEC / Parking PROPOSED BUS TERMINAL PHASE – 1 AREADISTRIBUTION PHASE 2 PROPOSAL Area distribution of bus station --- sq.m Total area 1,50,000 Administration BlockWorkshop 5,600 Bus Parking 78,600 Greenery 10% Circulation 15% INFERENCE Area distribution of bus station --- sq.m Administration Block 4951.10 Terminal 2 block 968.82 Workshop 2500 Circulation 5632.31 BUS TERMINAL Phase 1 proposal workshop area increased ( 17 buses ) Proposed FEC and parking area Proposed bus parking area for 120 buses in phase 1 Phase 2 proposal Area for new terminal as been demarcated Distance between existing and proposed bus terminal 2.4km MANOJ.S - 2200600043 208

NMT PROPOSALS

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N LOCATION HIERARCHYROAD ROAD WIDTH ( M ) FOB(HEIGHTM) FOB(WIDTHM) NTR BUS STAND SUBROADARTERIAL 34 4.5 5 * INCLUDES CONVEYOR BELT , ESCALATOR , ELEVATOR SPECIFICATION PROPOSAL - FOOT OVER BRIDGE ( FOB ) INFERENCE DESIGN SPECIFICATION 1) Its one of the congested road in guntur . 2) Lack of grade separated pedestrian crossing in this road leads to more traffic conjunction. steel truss bridge ADVANTAGES - STEELTRUSS BRIDGE ELEVATION FINANCIAL CALCULATIONS ➢Less cost ➢Simple to assemble on site ➢Flexibility in design ➢Strong load bearing capacity 3D VIEWS SECTIONS ➢Effective use of materials ➢Easy maintenance ➢Withstands extreme conditions S.NO PRICE/UNIT NO. OF UNITS TOTAL PRICE 1. steel truss bridge 8,22,00,000 1 8,22,00,000 2. CONVEYOR BELT 17,00,000 2 34,00,000 3. ESCALATOR 50,00,000 2 1,00,00,000 4. ELEVATOR 12,00,000 2 24,00,000 TOTAL 9,80,00,000 (approx) PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES - FOB MANOJ.S - 2200600043 209

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N PROPOSAL - ZEBRA CROSSING / SIGNALCONTROLLED LOCATION HIERARCHYROAD ROAD WIDTH ( M ) TYPE RSCENTERBROTHER SUBROADARTERIAL 30 4 INTERSECTIONLEG SPECIFICATION INFERENCE DESIGN PEDESTRIANSPECIFICATIONSIGNALHEADSSIGNAL 1) Lack of traffic signal for pedestrian crossing 2) Lack of markings for zebra crossings 3) refuge island for pedestrian waiting time 4) safety measures ( humps and light reflectors ) to slow down the vehicle. 5) Lack of signage board. SIGNALTIMINGS -APPROXIMATE METHOD WITH PEDESTRIANPEDESTRIANSIGNALFACILITIES MANOJ.S - 2200600043 210

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Based on speed ,Aa = 4 sec andAb = 3 sec Based on pedestrian walking speed 1.2 m/s. Clearing time for A= 22/1.2 = 18 sec Clearing time for B = 18/1.2 = 15 sec Adding 10 sec for initial walk period Minimum red time for road A= 18 + 10 = 28 sec B = 15 + 10 = 25 sec Minimum green based on pedestrian requirement for road A= 28 4 = 24 sec B = 15 3 = 12 sec Based on approach volume, the green time calculated for road a with higher traffic volume Ga/Gb = na/nb assume Gb = 24 sec Ga = 24 x 2100/1344 = 37.5 sec Total cycle time C = Ga +Aa + Gb +Ab = 37.5 + 4 + 24 + 3 = 68.5 sec Additional period = 69 68.5 = 0.5 sec is distributed to green timing in proportion to approach traffic volume GA= 37.5 + 0.5 x 2100/2100+1344 = 23.18 sec GB = 24 + 0.5 x 1344/2100 + 1344 = 9.57 sec RA= GB +AB = 9.57 + 3 = 12.57 sec RB = GA+ GA= 23.18 + 4 = 27.18 sec PEDESTRIAN SIGNALDESIGN Do not walk (DW) period of pedestrian signal at roadA(PSA) is red period of traffic signal at B (PSA) DWA = RB = 27.18 sec (PSB) DWB = RA= 12.57 sec Pedestrian clearance intervals (cl) are of 15 and 10 sec for roadAand B ** walk time (w) is calculated from total cycle length for PSA , WA = 69 (27.18 + 15) = 26.82 for PSB , WB = 69 (12.57+ 10) = 46.43 DESIGN OF PEDESTRIAN SIGNAL PHASE DIAGRAM G1 = 23.18 sec Road –A PSB A1 = 4 R1 = G2 + A2 = 12.57 CL = 10 DWB = 12.57 Road – B PSB WB = 46.43 sec WA = 26.82 sec R1 = G2 + A2 = 27.18 3=A1G2 = 9.57 sec WA 27.18= CL = 15 PEDESTRIAN SIGNALDESIGN MANOJ.S - 2200600043 211

Footpaths

carriageway Utility

PROPOSED ROAD SECTION TAZ Nos Locality Name Priority Reason 37 APSRTC Bus Stand Area PT Terminal, Hospital Zone 30 Railway station area Terminal , residential 45 Area between 2 ternimals 50 mixed use area TAZ Nos Locality Name Priority Reason 51 educational institution 54 educational institution 29 Commercial area 16 mixed use area Pedestrian crossings: Mid-block FOOTPATH MANOJ.S - 2200600043 212

The absence of a pedestrian zone forces pedestrians to walk in the boxes should be placed in the furniture zone, leaving clear space for pedestrians to walk designed as per the zoning system provide uninterrupted walking space for pedestrians

Excessive heights make footpaths hard to use, and many pedestrians prefer to walk in the carriageway. Footpaths with a height of no more than 150 mm are more likely to be used

A footpath that constantly changes levels discourages pedestrians from using it. Pedestrians prefer to walk on the carriageway instead

Footpaths that maintain a constant level through property entrances are convenient for pedestrians to use Vehicles use a ramp, helping to reduce speeds

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N FOOTPATH - PROPOSAL ARTERIAL ROAD Overall Road length KM Road width 26 M NO. of lane 6 lane 2 way Footpath 2M wide both sides COLLECTOR STREET Overall Road length KM Road width 18 M NO. of lane 4 lane 2 way Footpath 2M wide both sides SUBARTERIAL ROAD Overall Road length KM Road width 22 M NO. of lane 4-lane 2-way Footpath 2M wide both sides Phase : 1 Phase : 2 Pedestrian crossings: Intersection

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N SPECIFICATIONSPHASE:-2 s.no TAZ Nos Footpath Width ( M ) Construction Cost / sq.m Construction Cost / km Total length of road (km) Total cost 1. 51 2 700 14,00,000 15.52 21728000.00 2. 54 2 700 14,00,000 9.34 13076000.00 3. 29 2 700 14,00,000 7.52 10528000.00 4. 16 2 700 14,00,000 12.60 17640000.00 S.NO CONSTRUCTION COST / SQ.M COST / KM 1. Concrete Interlocking Paver Blocks 700 14,00,000 PHASE :- 1 s.no TAZ Nos Footpath Width ( M ) Construction Cost / sq.m Construction Cost /km Total length of road (km) Total cost 1. 37 2 700 14,00,000 8.72 12208000.00 2. 30 2 700 14,00,000 5.12 7168000.00 3. 45 2 700 14,00,000 4.34 6076000.00 4. 50 2 700 14,00,000 9.10 12740000.00 FINANCIAL CALCULATIONS FOOTPATH MANOJ.S - 2200600043 213

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N CYCLE TRACKS - PROPOSAL ARTERIAL ROAD Overall Road length KM Road width 26 M NO. of lane 6 lane 2 way Cycle track 2.5M wide both sides COLLECTOR STREET Overall Road length KM Road width 18 M NO. of lane 4 lane 2 way Cycle track 2M wide both sides SUBARTERIAL ROAD Overall Road length KM Road width 22 M NO. of lane 4-lane 2-way Cycle track 2.5M wide both sides CYCLING INFRASTRUCTURE CYCLE TRACK ➢Physical segregation ➢High speeds and volumes of motorised traffic CYCLE LANE ➢Visual segregation ➢Medium speeds and volumes of motorised traffic. To be applied in specific situations only PROPOSED ROAD SECTION RAISED CYCLE TRACK ➢Water runs off from the footpath to the cycle track to the buffer zone, to the carriageway ➢The buffer zone protects cyclists from vehicles with a full curb (hr = +120 mm) at the road side. ➢The footpath is located at +50 mm. above the cycle track to separate pedestrians and cyclists ➢In this example, if the buffer is 1 00 m wide and the cycle track 2.00 m. wide, the footpath would be located at +200 mm (100+10+40+50) above the carriageway4 . ➢If the buffer is permeable there is of course no need for a 1% slope Legend S.No LENGTHTOTAL(Km) 1. PHASE 1 79.03 2. PHASE 2 130.98 3. ARTERIAL ROAD 74.57 4. SUBROADARTERIAL 50.12 5. COLLECTORSTREET 85.32 LOCATIONS Map showing phase wise taz location for cycle track proposal CYCLE TRACKS MANOJ.S - 2200600043 214

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N CYCLE TRACKS - PROPOSAL PHASE - 1 PHASE - 2 construction cost S.No Road Hierarchy Cycle track Width ( M ) ConstructionCost/sq.m Total length of road (km) Total cost 1. ARTERIAL ROAD 2.5 4000 26.51 26,51,00,000 2. SUBROADARTERIAL 2.5 4000 21.81 21,81,00,000 3. collector street 2 4000 30.71 24,56,80,000 construction cost S.No Road Hierarchy Cycle track Width ( M ) ConstructionCost/sq.m Total length of road (km) Total cost 1. ARTERIAL ROAD 2.5 4000 48.06 48,06,00,000 2. SUBROADARTERIAL 2.5 4000 28.31 28,31,00,000 3. collector street 2 4000 54.61 43,68,80,000 S.no Location(taz) Approximatepopulation Numberstationsof Number of cycles Total cost 1. 16 28099 58 1404 3,81,80,000 2. 29 14632 30 731 1,98,70,500 3. 54 19670 40 983 2,67,06,500 4. 51 52842 110 2642 7,18,81,000 5. 52 49842 103 2492 6,77,69,000 6. 34 15458 32 772 2,09,98,000 7. 33 21474 44 1073 2,91,65,500 8. 30 13731 28 686 1,86,41,000 PLANNING GUIDELINES ❖Minimum system coverage area : 10 square kilometer ❖Station density : 10 16 stations per square kilometer ❖Bikes/resident : 10-30 bikes for every 1,000 residents ( within coverage area ) ❖Docks per bike ratio : 2 2.5 docking spaces for every bike PERFORMANCE METRICS ❖System efficiency : average number of daily uses 4 to 8 daily uses per bike ❖Average daily trips per resident 1 daily trip per 20 to 40 residents. STATION DENSITY ❖ One station every 300 meters ❖Thirty six stations per square mile S.no Location(taz) Approximatepopulation Numberstationsof Number of cycles Total cost 1. 18 24875 51 1243 3,37,87,500 2. 11 19997 41 999 2,71,55,500 3. 12 24524 51 1226 3,33,54,000 4. 15 22621 47 1131 3,07,67,500 5. 13 58844 122 2942 8,00,23,000 6. 9 7443 15 372 1,01,01,000 7. 8 45444 94 2272 6,17,90,000 8. 22 16579 34 828 2,25,08,000 9. 10 15484 32 777 2,11,25,500 CYCLE TRACKS MANOJ.S - 2200600043 215

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Stretch 2 : Boss Boma Center Naaz Center Stretch - 2 Road length 230 M Road width 18 M NO. of lane 4 lane 2 way divided Footpath 2M wide both sides Cycle track 2.5M wide both sides PROPOSAL NMT FACILITIES BETWEEN - TERNIMALS PROPOSED ROAD SECTION Stretch 1 Road length 680 M Road width 8 M NO. of lane 1 Footpath 2M wide both sides Stretch - 3 Road length 370 M Road width 14 M NO. of lane 2 lane 2 way divided Footpath 2M wide both sides Cycle track 2M wide both sides Stretch 1 :- Ntr Bus Stand Boss Boma Center Stretch 3 : Naaz Center Railway Station Stretch 1 :- Ntr Bus Stand – Boss Boma Center ➢In stretch 1 we are going to restrict the vehicle moment by placing the restrict barrier gate ➢Ballads will be provide in connecting roads to restrict vehicle moment from local streets ➢Barrier gate will open only in case of emergency service ➢Vehicle entry only for 2w (bicycle and motorcycle). ➢Dedicated E - rickshaw will be provide in this route for those who are travelling from bus terminal to railway terminal . E - RICKSHAW RESTRICT THE VEHICLE MOMENT PREDISTRAIN STREET - DESIGN DETAILS PREDISTRAIN STREET PREDISTRAIN RAMPS SEGREGATED AND CONNECTED NMT ROUTES REFUGEAERA BICYCLE PARKINGSTREET FURNITURE NMT FACILITIES BETWEEN TERNIMALS MANOJ.S - 2200600043 216

PARKING PROPOSALS

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N HORIZON YEAR ADDITIONAL PARKING AREA DEMAND ECS/100 sqmt Parking problems • Increase in number of motor vehicles. • Rise in the level of ownership of private vehicles. • Accelerated development of land including multi- storey buildings. • Haphazard use of available parking spaces. • Loss of existing parking spaces by way of providing cycle tracks and footpath. • Concentration of commercial and business activities. Phase I • Give free Parking permits to the residents and owners (commercial area). • Charge for on street parking. • Implement off street parking charges. Phase II • Increase Charges for on street parking. • Revise prices for off street parking. Phase III • In the third phase the on street parking must become very less and use of off street parking will be encouraged due to less prices when compared to on street. TAZ Built 2041(sq.mt)areaup Built 2021(sq.mt)areaup 2041(sq.mt)AdditionalBuiltuparea AttractioTotaln Avg ECS/Attr2Wactions Avg ECS/Attr4Wactions ECS/AttrAvgactions AttractionsTotalECS AttractionsDemandParkingforECShours RequiremeBayntforAttractionsinECS AttractionSuppliedBayforinECS AdditionalDemand DemandforECS/100sqmt 1 59461.5 42547.0 16914.5 45700.4 0.02 0.00 0.02 1062.4 10623.8 1062.4 99.2 963.2 1.62 2 158297.0 93172.8 65124.2 39766.8 0.03 0.01 0.04 924.4 9244.5 924.4 236.7 687.8 0.43 8 54931.9 49037.3 5894.7 30947.1 0.02 0.00 0.02 618.9 6189.4 618.9 371.0 1450.7 0.71 9 202799.9 94399.6 108400.3 141326.6 0.03 0.02 0.05 6038.5 60385.0 6038.5 226.9 392.1 2.49 18 106952.2 37500.0 69452.2 11668.2 0.02 0.00 0.02 233.4 2333.6 233.4 115.9 117.5 0.31 19 53961.4 41380.5 12580.9 19804.8 0.02 0.00 0.02 396.1 3961.0 396.1 190.7 205.4 0.38 RDS Scenario ADDITIONAL PARKING AREA DEMAND ECS/100 sqmt PARKING PROPOSAL SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 217

Advantages: •

•

Automatic Number Plate Recognition Camera Surveillance Cameras Vehicle Occupancy Detectors installed on the ground , will continuously sense the presence of vehicle in the slot and sends the data to the receiver wirelessly. SHUKLA 2200600050

•

PARKING PROPOSAL SANSKRITI

–

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N SMART PARKING MANAGEMENT SYSTEM Parking Zone Features: • Access the real time occupancy of individual parking Lots. • one-to-one mapping with parking sensors • Captures & Stores the number plate images of vehicles entering and exiting parking lot. • Generation of parking receipts at the parking Lot. • Hardware failure can be reported & tracked through portal • Surveillance cameras at the Parking lots provide secured monitoring. • There will be surveillance cameras (Visible & Infrared based) with Zoom Capability situated at entry and exit points to monitor the parking zone. • Any unauthorized vehicle entry which is not going through the Number Plate Recognition can be easily verified by the Operator through the Surveillance Monitor. • Public (Users) can check the availability of the parking zone through Mobile App installed in their mobiles . • Vehicle Occupancy Detectors installed on the ground , will continuously sense the presence of vehicle in the slot and sends the data to the receiver wirelessly.

218

Real Time Vacancy Availability Database Synchronization with Central Server. Highly customizable to any type of parking lot.

ANPR Camera Detection works for vehicles travelling at high speed as well. Dedicated Surveillance system which can store the video data of 2 months duration. Less man-power to maintain the parking zone. Works in almost all weather conditions.

•

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NPARKING ANALYSIS PARKING DEMAND IN COMMERCIAL AREA Legend Landuse_parcel LANDUSE INDUSTRIALCOMMERCIALAGRICULTURALMIXEDRESICOMMERCIALPUBLICSEMIPUBLICRECREATIONALRESIDENTIALTRANSPORT TAZ LU Entropy 43 0.532504 TAZ LU Entropy 40 0.481002 TAZ LU Entropy 29 0.545566 TAZ LU Entropy 42 0.488649 SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 219

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N EXISTING PARKING CONDITION OF TAZ 29 0 0.1 0.050.2 Kilometers HDFC Bank Issues with On-street parking • Demand is scattered on full stretch of roads • Busiest commercial place in Guntur. • FREE On Street parking • There are no organized on street marked parking arrangements in this major commercial area of the city. • The capacity of the roads is further reduced by vehicles parked on the roadsides. This, in fact, is one of the major bottlenecks to smooth flow of road traffic. 64%16%9%11% >2hrs130min-<30min1hrhr-2hrs PARKING DURATION FOR 2W Average parking duration 22 min Encroachments of hawkers has resulted in congestion of these areas and the consequent narrowing of the area. Unauthorized parking Congestion due to parking Landmark Location having high congestion at peak hour Similarly unorganized parking and shops lead to the heterogeneous crowding of vehicles and people in area. PARKING ANALYSIS SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 220

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N 1- Safe Parking • Shaded parking • Implement off street parking charges 3 - Strategy • Fine for on street parking. • Public awareness and hoardings. • Restricting for 4 wheelers at peak hours Morning – 9:00 11:00AM Evening – 6:00 – 8:30 PM (in strategical way by imposing fine) 2- Connectivity • Pedestrian walkways connectivity from off street parking location to major commercial places. • Availability of IPT connectivity in low prices. Following areas were identified as the places that can be developed as the off street parking areas in order to reduce the congestion on streets as well as to manage the future vehicular growth TAZ (sq.m)Area Type Vehicleof No. BaysParkingof (sq.m)requirementArea 50 800 2w 480 600 4w 9 123.75 30 700 2w 420 525 4w 8 110 MAP REPRESENTING OFF-STREET PARKING LOCATIONS 121086420 14 11:00-11:15 11:15-11:30 11:30-11:45 11:45-12:00 12:00-12:15 12:15-12:30 12:30-12:45 12:45-13:00 13:00-13:15 13:15-13:30 13:30-13:45 13:45-14:00 14:00-14:15 14:15-14:30 14:30-14:45 14:45-15:00 15:00-15:15 15:15-15:30 15:30-15:45 15:45-16:00 16:00-16:15 16:15-16:30 16:30-16:45 16:45-17:00 17:00-17:15 17:15-17:30 17:30-17:45 17:45-18:00 ACCUMULATION CURVE STRETCH 2 ECSTotal TIME 2520151050

ACCUMULATION CURVE STRETCH 1 ECSTotal TIME Off street parking location 250m proximity 500m proximity 4w restricted route PARKING PROPOSAL SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 221

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N LOCATION TAZ (sq.m)Area Type Vehicleof No. Parkingof Bays Area (sq.m)requirement 1 14 1100 2w 600 750 4w 15 206.25 2 44 500 2w 220 275 4w 8 110 PARKING ACCUMULATION CURVE ON DIFFERENT STRETCH STRETCH 1 STRETCH 2 STRETCH 3 STRETCH 4 Off street parking location On street parking survey location Existing On street parking 4w restricted route MAP REPRESENTING PROPOSED OFF-STREET PARKING LOCATIONS Average parking duration 46 min Average parking duration 57 min Average parking duration 40 min Average parking duration 52 min OFF-STREET PARKING 0 5 3025201510 TIME ECSTotal 151050 20 3025 TIME ECSTotal 20151050 25 30 86420 10 1412 TIME ECSTotal TIME ECSTotal 1 2 3 4 IPT connectivity • Fine for on street parking. • Public awareness and hoardings. • Restricting for 4 wheelers at peak hours Morning 9:00 11:00AM Evening – 6:00 8:30PM Strategy PARKING PROPOSAL SANSKRITI SHUKLA – 2200600050 222

TRAFFIC PROPOSALSDECONGESTION

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NProposals : Road widening Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 PROPOSALS : ROAD WIDENING Existing 4 lane Road divided Proposed 6 lane Road divided S. No Road Name Typology BASE YEAR(2021) BAU(2041) Proposed ConfigurationLane ZDP(2041) PeakPCUHour V/C LOS PeakPCUHour V/C LOS V/C LOS 1 Brodipeta 4 Lane Divided 12672 2.35 F 33187 6.15 F 6 Lane Divided 3.95 F 2 Muduvanthanallu 4 Lane Divided 7838 1.45 F 20527 3.80 F 6 Lane Divided 2.44 F 3 Railway Crossing 4 Lane Divided 7597 1.41 F 19897 3.68 F 6 Lane Divided 2.37 F 5 Prattipadu Road 4 Lane Divided 2456 0.45 B 6432 1.19 F 6 Lane Divided 0.77 D 6 Tenali 4 Lane Divided 5157 0.96 E 13506 2.5 F 6 Lane Divided 1.61 F 8 Narsaraopeta 4 Lane Divided 4361 0.81 D 11421 2.12 F 6 Lane Divided 1.36 F 9 Amaravati Road 4 Lane Divided 3836 0.71 C 10047 1.86 F 6 Lane Divided 1.20 F ▪ Brodipet, Muduvanthanallu, Railway crossing and Teanli road cannot accommodate Traffic in the Horizon year. ▪ Comparison of values in the base year and horizon year we can come to a conclusion of providing extra lane. ▪ As we design new lane for Peak hour volume providing six lane divided road is not economically viable. ▪ Shoulders can be used during the peak hour if the proposed carriage way is not sufficient. FACTORS FOURDIVIDEDLANEROAD DIVIDEDFOURLANEROAD LANE WIDTH 3.5 3.5 CAPACITY(PCU/HR) 2700 4200 223

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NDISTANCE TIME ANALYSIS OF SCENARIO-1 Distance(BAU) TAZ OC1(55) OC5(56) OC3(57) OC2(58) OC4(59) OC6(60) OC7(61) OC1(55) 0 9.534235 17.65969 20.14553 27.21819 21.91574 14.06835 OC5(56) 9.550337 0 13.31254 15.79837 22.87104 22.70904 15.96763 OC3(57) 17.65969 13.31254 0 17.12585 24.33624 25.63295 24.83385 OC2(58) 20.14553 15.79837 17.12574 0 18.65043 19.47797 26.58166 OC4(59) 27.21819 22.87104 24.33613 18.65043 0 16.39924 26.41763 OC6(60) 20.53399 23.06243 24.52753 18.84183 16.39924 0 17.48298 OC7(61) 14.3253 17.78639 24.27044 18.58125 25.58606 16.63266 0 Time(BAU) TAZ OC1(55) OC5(56) OC3(57) OC2(58) OC4(59) OC6(60) OC7(61) OC1(55) 0 15.63536 31.9949 37.54045 52.95774 50.80138 30.16226 OC5(56) 15.84602 0 24.25816 29.80371 45.221 54.72592 36.88493 OC3(57) 31.62876 23.21154 0 34.09029 49.50808 60.67887 53.90092 OC2(58) 36.18494 27.76772 32.97628 0 36.81048 47.59539 58.45697 OC4(59) 46.21857 37.80135 43.14243 31.42618 0 34.61475 65.59502 OC6(60) 52.81944 50.39006 55.73115 44.01489 38.6136 0 34.06781 OC7(61) 34.85006 42.64259 59.90281 64.77584 80.71986 37.24916 0 Distance-Time analysis of External Zones in Scenario-1 (55) (57) (56) (58)(59) (60) (61) ▪ In this scenario, the existing road network is not changed. Inference: ▪ For BAU scenario average distance between 2 outer cordon point is 19.65km ▪ Average travel time to cover distance between two outer cordon points is around 42 mins ASHUTOSH -2200600038 AKHIL -2200600049 224

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Distance(NTDPC) TAZ OC1(55) OC5(56) OC3(57) OC2(58) OC4(59) OC6(60) OC7(61) OC1(55) 0 9.534235 17.65969 20.14553 31.70767 20.65171 9.257781 OC5(56) 9.550337 0 13.31254 15.79837 22.87104 30.0104 18.61647 OC3(57) 17.65969 13.31254 0 17.12585 24.33624 26.83299 26.7637 OC2(58) 20.14553 15.79837 17.12574 0 18.65043 21.14718 29.24954 OC4(59) 31.70767 22.87104 24.33613 18.65043 0 14.12244 23.16216 OC6(60) 20.65171 30.0104 26.83288 21.14718 14.12244 0 12.10621 OC7(61) 9.257781 18.61647 26.7637 29.24954 23.16216 12.10621 0 Time(NTDPC) TAZ OC1(55) OC5(56) OC3(57) OC2(58) OC4(59) OC6(60) OC7(61) OC1(55) 0 15.49897 31.16076 35.86695 40.56493 22.03694 9.087598 OC5(56) 15.84437 0 23.76549 28.47168 38.52877 37.91523 24.96589 OC3(57) 30.95884 22.58177 0 33.10081 43.15918 49.37331 40.44644 OC2(58) 36.36027 27.98319 33.40216 0 31.77021 37.98435 45.84787 OC4(59) 41.78062 38.17898 43.79803 32.10771 0 22.56148 33.72538 OC6(60) 20.99447 36.38152 48.02925 36.33893 20.57857 0 12.93923 OC7(61) 8.807719 24.19477 40.36848 45.07467 32.22981 13.70182 0 (56)(55)(57)(58) (59) (60) (61) Distance-Time analysis of External Zones in Scenario-2 In this scenario the road widening is proposed on the major roads which having high traffic volume which Is going to exceed further in near future. Inference: ▪ For ZDP scenario average distance between 2 outer cordon point is 19.65km ▪ Average travel time to cover distance between two outer cordon points is around 31 mins DISTANCE TIME ANALYSIS OF SCENARIO-2 ASHUTOSH -2200600038 AKHIL -2200600049 225

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Prepared by: TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL GROUP ASHUTOSH -2200600038 | GAUTAMI 2200600046 AKHIL 2200600049 | SHASHANK 2200600051 VAISHNAVI 2200600036 Distance(Proposed Radial Road in RDS) TAZ OC1(55) OC5(56) OC3(57) OC2(58) OC4(59) OC6(60) OC7(61) OC1(55) 0 9.534235 17.65969 20.14553 27.21819 20.80997 14.3253 OC5(56) 9.510421 0 13.31254 15.79837 22.87104 23.06243 15.96763 OC3(57) 17.65969 13.31254 0 17.12585 24.33624 25.56622 24.09583 OC2(58) 20.14553 15.79837 17.12574 0 18.65043 19.88042 26.58166 OC4(59) 27.21819 22.87104 24.33613 18.65043 0 16.39924 27.49098 OC6(60) 22.25376 23.06243 24.52753 18.84183 16.39924 0 17.48298 OC7(61) 14.3253 17.78639 24.27044 26.75627 27.49098 17.48298 0 Time(Proposed Radial Road in RDS) TAZ OC1(55) OC5(56) OC3(57) OC2(58) OC4(59) OC6(60) OC7(61) OC1(55) 0 15.40758 29.60115 33.40136 41.75926 41.5222 29.10759 OC5(56) 15.73889 0 22.42244 26.22265 34.58055 41.8433 31.03799 OC3(57) 29.2001 21.62466 0 30.57289 38.46993 45.75006 44.63767 OC2(58) 33.40841 25.83298 30.73868 0 27.81249 35.09262 48.84598 OC4(59) 41.18675 33.61132 38.63573 27.81249 0 26.23083 51.41172 OC6(60) 42.93007 41.44657 46.47097 35.64774 26.23083 0 32.7113 OC7(61) 29.29517 33.27532 45.64819 49.4484 51.41172 32.7113 0 (56)(55)(57)(58)(59) (60) (61) Distance-Time analysis of External Zones in Scenario-3 Inference: ▪ For RDS scenario average distance between 2 outer cordon point is 19.95km ▪ Average travel time to cover distance between two outer cordon points is around 34 mins. ▪ After combining Scenario 2 & 3, the Average travel time decreases to 29.19 minutes. Scenario Sceanrio-1 Sceanrio-2 Sceanrio-3 Scenario 2 + 3 Avg(KM)Dist 19.65 20.15 19.96 20.22 Avg(Mins)Time 42.22 31.15 34.78 29.19 Comparison of BAU, NTDPC & RDS scenario ▪ In this scenario the Radial Road is proposed on the west side of city connecting Chennai Vijayawada NH ▪ This Radial ring road will connect these OC points and divert the traffic which is going through these points. Distance time analysis of Scenario-3 226

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N DIVERSION CURVE & UPGRADATIONJUNCTION 1009080706050403020100 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 roadproposedontravelPercentage Travel time Ratio Diversion Curve For Proposed Radial Road Diversion curve is the basic approach used for the traffic assignment purposes. The method is similar to the mode choice curve. Traffic between two routes can be computed as a function of relative cost or travel time. The diversion curve based on the travel time ratio is shown in the figure below. Inferences: ▪ It Is observed from the graph that as the travel time ratio increases the percentage of the traffic from old route is diverting towards new proposed route. P = 100 / 1+r6 P=Where,Percentage Diversion from old route to new route r = ratio of Travel time in new route to old route ��= �� Optimum Cycle time using WEBSTER method : Co = (1.5L+5)/(1-Y) LWhere,=Total Lost Time L = nl + R, n = number of phases L = lost time for the phase (Usually taken as 2 sec) R = time during each cycle When all signals display red Y = y1+y2+y3+…..+yn y1+y2+y3+…..+yn = maximum ratio of flow to saturation flow for phases 1,2,3,…,n i.e: q/s where q is the flow and s is the saturation flow. I = Green Time + Amber Time – Effective Green Time = G+a-g y1 0.40 y2 0.22 y3 0.26 Y 0.88 Lost time(L) Lost time(tL) 3 Amber(a) 3 All Red 2 No.Of phases 3 L 12 Optimum cycle time(Co) 192 Modified Optimum cycle time(Co) 190 Effective Green Time(G) 178 Splitting of green time between Phases: Effective Green actual green g1 81 82 g2 44 45 g3 53 54 3 STATUE JUNCTION Road 1 Towards Ramesh Hospiral Road 2 Towards Ethurot Junction Road 3 Kankargutta Brodge Road Junction Upgradation Non-signalized to signalized intersection (Webster Method): Three Statue junction needs junction improvement from non signalized to Roadsignalized.1 82 3 105 Road 2 85 45 3 57 Road 3 133 54 3 ASHUTOSH -2200600038 AKHIL -2200600049 227

ROAD SAFETY PROPOSALS

•

ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR

Source:Road

• Paving of shoulders of width min. 2.5m and provision of footpaths can bring down runoff vehicular crash risk by 77%.

•

The vehicular growth rate for 2026 showed the road safety scores as severe risk with existing infrastructure.

•

The existing road widening proposals to incorporate motorcycle facilities without barrier separation.

The cost per fatality is 3.6 lakh (includes property damage and vehicular damages) in India. The socioeconomic costs due to road accidents are calculated based on Lost Days for Fatal ,Grievous & Minor. Victim Age for Fatal Per capita income Life Expectancy at different age(Census of India)

•

Under State Support Programme for Strengthening Road Safety to help realize the vision of 'Zero road fatalities on Indian roads, MoRTH has set out 7,7270 crore for 14 states. The AP has a sanction of Rs. 480 crores towards road safety improvements in the state. R&B department has setup a committee to study the blackspots at district level.

• Unsignalised marked pedestrian and bicycle crossing facilities to reduce the severity of a crash by 85 90%.

Value of lost output for fatalities = Victim Age for Fatal x Victim Age for Fatal accidents costing in India IIT Delhi, Road accidents data 2018 MoRTH K

•

The most vulnerable road users are bicyclists and pedestrians with the average of 2.stars which is very poor. In addition to the major risk attributes, the road markings, signage's contribute to 20 25% risk to the road users.

•

-2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 228

Value of lost output for injuries = Lost Days for Fatal ,Grievous & Minor x Per capita income

ANALYSIS OUTCOMES PROPOSALS

• Medians are to be retrofitted with steel/ concrete barriers, which can bring down the head on crash risks to almost 0.

•

The analysis showed that the safety scores on the selected stretches are at moderate risk level in base year (2021).

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NROAD SAFETY COST ESTIMATION Laxmipuram road MAINTENANCE COST ESTIMATION FOR SELECTED SEGMENTS TYPE OF WORK ESTIMATED COST (INR) Pot holes/ patch work 2,54,800 Laying of Prime coat, tack coat, HMA 3,42,065 Thermoplastic road markings 44,800 Warning/ informatory sign boards 114,714 Median separators 221,900 Total estimated value 11,46,373 medical expenses (pvt hospital) fatal Grievous Injury Minor Injury 2014 84,99,616 8,13,45,268 32,97,808 2015 1,30,15,037 6,50,18,929 26,35,924 2016 61,09,099 2,23,41,306 9,05,736 medical expenses (govt hospital) fatal Grievous Injury Minor Injury 2014 16,80,832 2,70,79,400 16,84,972 2015 25,73,774 2,16,44,450 13,46,791 2016 12,08,098 74,37,300 4,62,774 Medical expenses Government hospital Severity Fatal Grievous Injury Minor Injury During Hospitalisation 49,142 52,625 2,353 During Post Hospitalisation - 36,589 2,272 Out of pocket expenses 3,384 6,136 1,309 Total Medical Cost 52,526 95,350 5,933 Severity Fatal Grievous Injury Minor Injury During Hospitalisation 2,61,060 1,87,925 6,327 During HospitalisationPost - 89,935 3,998 Out of pocket expenses 4,553 8,567 1,287 Total Medical Cost 265613 286427 11,612 Medical expenses Private hospital Source: Road accidents costing in India IIT Delhi Source: Road accidents costing in India IIT Delhi Source: SOR, Andhra Pradesh TYPE OF WORK QUANTITY ESTIMATED COST (INR) Footpath 149 cum 634,480 Table top crossings 238 cum 443,364 Safety concretebarriers- 200 cum. 857,400 Estimated value 1935244 ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 229

ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS (HORIZON YEAR)

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N RECETORId X Y CO (mg/m3) (ug/m3)PM2.5 PM10 (ugm/m3) AQI O1 431824.1989 1803662.565 1.05 117.2 145.2 290.6667 O2 429719.3944 1797949.812 1.66 160.1 187.6 330.8462 O3 438558.7744 1801308.42 1.92 179.6 206.3 345.8462 O4 437888.4283 1797042.81 0.70 92.3 119.8 207.6667 O5 439626.7253 1809368.306 0.96 111.8 139.9 272.6667 O6 440139.498 1806885.332 0.96 112.1 139.9 273.6667 O7 439852.8646 1802945.003 0.96 109.6 136.4 265.3333 O8 440723.0704 1801328.263 1.75 170.9 198.4 339.1538 O9 444698.5396 1805284.004 2.18 199.4 227.6 361.0769 O10 443221.758 1798876.889 1.31 136.2 163.6 312.4615 O11 446866.4007 1795133.027 0.09 47.9 75.6 79.83333 O12 444798.481 1802136.493 0.52 76.9 104.8 156.3333 O13 435051.8167 1802534.315 1.05 120.4 148.8 300.3077 O14 433936.2452 1799552.045 1.66 164.1 192.6 333.9231 O15 439381.59 1799068.89 0.70 92.1 119.1 207 O16 441715.13 1801525.007 2.50 198.2 225 360.1538 O17 443210.0885 1803408.605 2.40 195.6 223 358.1538 BUSINESS AS USUAL SCENARIO MODELLED YEAR EMISSIONS 2041 DISPERSION MAPPING OF PM 10 DISPERSION MAPPING OF CODISPERSION MAPPING OF PM 2.5 ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 230

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS Good Minimal Impact Poor Breathing discomfort to people on prolonged exposure (0 50) (201 300) Satisfactory Minor breathing discomfort to sensitive people Very Poor Respiratory illness to the people on prolonged exposure (51 100) (301 400) Moderate Breathing discomfort to the people with lung, Severe Respiratory effects even on healthy people (101 200) (>401) BUSINESS AS USUAL SCENARIO HORIZON YEAR MODELLED EMISSION COMAPRISON WITH APPCB STANDARDS AIR QUALITY INDEX PROPOSED LANDUSE MAP 2041 ➢ The above maps show the relation between the modelled emission levels and AQI with landuse. ➢ It can be observed that the pollution levels are higher under BAU scenario in regions with commercial and public buildings. ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 231

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N Emission Load for BAU Scenario Emission Load Calculation (Vehicle Kilometers Travelled Method) ❑ Total Population (Source Projected Population of 2041) ❑ Projected Per Capita Trip Rate (Source Household Survey) ❑ Modal Split 2041 BAU(Source Results from fuzzy logic, Data Household Survey) ❑ Occupancy (Source Guntur CTS report) ❑ Emission Standards (Source NAAQ) INPUTS: TOTAL POPULATION (A) 1784324 PER CAPITA TRIP RATE (B) 0.98 Total Person Trips (AXB) 1748637.52 Vehicular Trips Modes 2W CAR AUTO BUS Share [C] 37.8 0.5 41.9 19.8 Occupancy [D] 1.39 3.23 4.68 32.21 Modal trips/ Vehicular trips [AB*C/D] 475528 2706.869 156555 10749.15 Mode wise Av. Trip Length (km) [E] 10.52 21.09 14.46 30.64 VEHICLE KM TRAVELLED 5002563 57087.9 2263791 329354.06 2W CAR AUTO BUS Emission Factors (g/km) Standards from NAAQS CO2 26.62 223.6 60.3 515.2 PM 0.05 0.03 0.2 0.56 NOX 0.19 0.2 1.28 12 HC 1.42 0.25 0.14 0.18 CO 2.2 1.98 5.1 3.6 Pollution Load from Vehicles [ (VKT* Emission Factor)/1000000)] CO2 (Tonnes/day) 133.17 12.76 136.51 169.68 PM(Tonnes/day) 0.25 0.00 0.45 0.18 NOX (Tonnes/day) 0.95 0.01 2.90 3.95 HC (Tonnes/day) 7.10 0.01 0.32 0.29 CO (Tonnes/day) 11.01 0.11 11.55 1.19 Pollution Load from Vehicles (Tonnes/ Year) CO2 (Tonnes/year) 48606.40 4659.17 49824.90 61934.37 PM (Tonnes/year) 91.30 0.63 165.26 67.32 NOX (Tonnes/year) 346.93 4.17 1057.64 1442.57 HC (Tonnes/year) 2592.83 5.21 115.68 104.59 CO (Tonnes/year) 4017.06 41.26 4214.05 432.77 OBSERVATION: ➢ From the analysis it can be observed that maximum emission load is produced by Bus followed by auto and 2 W. ➢ It is important to follow zero emission model by proposing electric auto and Bus for the city. ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS 0.00 250.00200.00150.00100.0050.00 (tonnes/day)CO2 (tonnes/day)PM (tonnes/day)NOX (tonnes/day)HC (tonnes/day)CO EMISSION LOAD - VEHICLE TYPE 2W CAR AUTO BUS ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 232

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N SCENARIO 1 CO emission load for E mobility ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS MODE SHAREMODE FACTOREMISSION EMISSIONMODELLED 2W 37.8 % 2.2 5.57 CAR 0.5 % 1.98 0.06 AUTO 41.9 % 5.1 5.85 BUS 19.8 % 3.6 0.60 TOTAL 100 % 12.88 12.08 MODE SHAREMODE FACTOREMISSION EMISSIONMODELLED 2W 35.75% 2.2 10.41 CAR 0.50% 1.98 0.11 AUTO 39.41% 0 0 BUS 24.35% 0 0 TOTAL 100 % 12.88 10.52 Emission Load for base year MODE SHAREMODE FACTOREMISSION EMISSIONMODELLED 2W 37.8 % 2.2 11.01 CAR 0.5 % 1.98 0.11 AUTO 41.9 % 5.1 11.55 BUS 19.8 % 3.6 1.19 TOTAL 100 % 12.88 23.86 Emission Load for BAU scenario Emission Load for E mobility 2041 302520151050 base year BAU scenario E-Mobility scenario Emission load comparison 35.7524.35%39.41%0.50% Proposed Vehicular Composition 2W AUTO BUS CAR BUS- 100% AUTO- 100% BIKE- 0% CAR- 0% “Electric vehicles share by 2041” ➢ The emission load for the 2041 under do nothing scenario is 23.84 which is way higher then the emission standards. ➢ With introduction of 100% electric autos and Buses the emission load comes significantly down to 10.52 which lower than the standards. ➢ Modelled Mode share for 2041 focuses to promote public transport with the introduction of electric buses. OBSERVATION: ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 233

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR NENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS SCENARIO-2 CARBON ABSORPTION BY VEGETATION Carbon Storage (CO2)= 1% of Total Biomass of Tree Total Biomass = AGB + BGB Above Ground Biomass (AGB) = Bio-Volume x Wood Density Bio-Volume = 0.4 x (GBH)² x H / 3.14 Below Ground Biomass (BGB) = AGB x 0.26 Where, GBH Girth Breast Height & H Height of tree CARBON ABSORPTION FORMULA: Source: Carbon stock estimation major tree species in Attarsumbarange, Gandhinagar forest division, India ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 234

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS PLANTING PALETE Duranta erecta1 Height 1-2 m canopy 0.5 1 m Nerium Indicum2 Height 2 m canopy 1 1.5 m Ixora coccinea3 Height 1-2 m canopy 1-2 m Wodyetia bifurcata1 Height 9-10 m canopy 3-4 m Height 10-12 m canopy 5 6 m Delonix regia2 As per agro climatic zones, Guntur city comes under the southern plateau and hills and alluvial soil zone. SHRUBS TREES Very little light required Full Sunlight in all season not required Requires full sunlight Keep the compost moderately dry. Only water during the growing period. Keep the compost moderately moist during growth Keep the compost moist, ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 235

TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING STUDIO Department of Planning MTIP III Semester School of Planning & Architecture, Vijayawada An Institute of National Importance, Ministry of Education, GOI. COMPREHENSIVE MOBILITY PLAN OF GUNTUR N ▪ Trees planted at last row with 12 mts spacing in between TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION FOR PLANTATION: coccineaIxoraNerium Indicum Duranta erecta ENVIRONMENT ANALYSIS

ABHIJIT SAHANI-2200600035 SUNIL KUMAR K -2200600052 KRUSHNA BHUSHAN-2200600045 237

▪

In median width of 3 meters, one row of shrub whereas in 5 meter median width, plantation of two rows of shrubs are proposed. Only two rows of shrubs will be planted on median width of 5 meters and these plants will be at a spacing of 1.5 meters from the inner edge of the median.

➢ A

For ornamental plants SPECIFICATIONS

➢ The

Distance from embankment 1.0 mts. away from toe of embankment

▪

The 1st row will be small and medium ornamental trees Turfing with grass in the median, special landscapes, and embankment slopes

Spacing between plants to plants 3 mts. Spacing between rows 3 mts Size of pits 60X60X60 cms No. of plants per km 333 Height of plants 1.5m to 2 m

▪

Spacing between plants to plants 12 mts. Spacing between rows 3 mts Size of pits 60X60X60 cms No. of plants per km 84 Height of plants More than 2 mts source: green highways plantation policy 2015. road landscape shall be developed envisaging a holistic approach to the entire stretch. concept shall be evolved so as to maintain visual characteristics and uniformity in terms of landscape along the stretch

Distance from preceding row 3 mts

For shaded trees SPECIFICATIONS

We, the students of 3rd Semester, Transportation and Infrastructure Planning along with the faculty members extend our hearty gratitude on behalf of the entire family of School of Planning and Architecture, Vijayawada to the Commissioner of Guntur Municipal Corporation for their help for the continuous support for giving us the opportunity to work with them regarding the Comprehensive Mobility Plan preparation for the city of Guntur and providing us with the required survey data.

ACKNOWLEDMENT