DOCSLIB.ORG

Bus Rapid Transit and Pedestrian Improvements Project in Jakarta”

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bus Rapid Transit and Pedestrian Improvements Project in Jakarta” United Nations Environment Program Terminal Evaluation of the UNEP/ GEF Project “Bus Rapid Transit and Pedestrian Improvements Project in Jakarta” Prepared by Philip Sayeg and Harun al-Rasyid Lubis Evaluation Office May 2014 Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................................... iii Project General Information ..................................................................................................................... iv Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................... v I. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................1 II. The Evaluation...................................................................................................................................2 III. The Project ........................................................................................................................................3 A. Context .....................................................................................................................................3 B. Objectives and components (goals and objectives) ....................................................................4 C. Target areas and groups ............................................................................................................6 D. Milestones/ Key Dates in project design and implementation ....................................................6 E. Implementation arrangements ..................................................................................................7 F. Project financing .......................................................................................................................8 G. Project partners ........................................................................................................................9 H. Changes in design during implementation .................................................................................9 I. Reconstructed Theory of Change ............................................................................................. 11 IV. Evaluation Findings.......................................................................................................................... 13 A. Strategic Relevance ................................................................................................................. 13 B. Achievement of Outputs .......................................................................................................... 13 C. Effectiveness – Attainment of Project Objectives and Results ................................................... 14 (i) Direct outcomes from reconstructed TOC ..................................................................... 14 (ii) Effectiveness issues related to outcomes ...................................................................... 16 (iii) Likelihood of impact based on the Reconstructed TOC using ROtI ................................. 19 (iv) Achievement of project goal and planned objectives ..................................................... 24 D. Sustainability and Replication .................................................................................................. 24 (i) Socio-political sustainability .......................................................................................... 24 (ii) Financial resources ....................................................................................................... 25 (iii) Institutional framework ................................................................................................ 26 (iv) Environmental sustainability ......................................................................................... 26 (v) Catalytic role and replication ........................................................................................ 28 E. Efficiency................................................................................................................................. 29 F. Factors Affecting Performance ................................................................................................ 29 (i) Preparation and readiness ............................................................................................ 29 (ii) Project implementation and management .................................................................... 30 (iii) Stakeholder participation and public awareness ........................................................... 30 (iv) Country ownership and driven-ness .............................................................................. 32 (v) Financial planning and management ............................................................................. 32 (vi) UNEP Supervision and backstopping ............................................................................. 32 Terminal Evaluation of BRT and Pedestrian Improvement Project, Jakarta Final Evaluation Report (vii) Monitoring and evaluation............................................................................................ 33 G. Complementarity with UNEP Strategies and Programs ............................................................. 34 V. Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................................. 35 A. Conclusions ............................................................................................................................. 35 B. Lessons Learned ...................................................................................................................... 41 C. Recommendations .................................................................................................................. 41 Annex 1: Chronology of Transjakarta Corridor Implementation ................................................................ 43 Annex 2: Persons Met and Contacted ...................................................................................................... 46 Annex 3. Actual Project Costs and Co-Financing ....................................................................................... 51 Annex 4: Objectives, Outcomes and Milestones Used in Design and Implementation Reporting ............... 54 Annex 5: Reconstructed TOC ................................................................................................................... 63 Annex 6: Description of Achievement of Outputs and Direct Outcomes, and Ratings ................................ 69 Annex 7: TE Surveys on BRT TransJakarta Performance ............................................................................ 80 Annex 8: Classification of Transjakarta Passengers by Age and Gender 2010 ............................................ 97 Annex 9: Assessment of GHG Reduction Estimates................................................................................... 98 Annex 10: Analysis of Media Reports ..................................................................................................... 105 Annex 11: Other Aspects of Efficiency .................................................................................................... 111 Annex 12: Evaluation TOR (without annexes) ......................................................................................... 112 Annex 13: Brief CVs of the Consultants .................................................................................................. 131 Annex 14: References ............................................................................................................................ 134 ii Terminal Evaluation of BRT and Pedestrian Improvement Project, Jakarta Final Evaluation Report Acronyms and Abbreviations µg microgram ADB Asian Development Bank BLU Badan Pelayanan Umum, public service entity BRT Bus Rapid Transit BUMD Badan Usaha Milik Dearah, regional government company CEO Chief Executive Officer CNG Compressed Natural Gas DGEF Division of GEF Coordination (in UNEP) DisHub Dinas Perhubungan, DKI transportation agency DisPU Dinas Pekerjaan Umum, DKI public works agency DKI Daerah Khusus Ibukota, special capital region, referring either to Jakarta or to its provincial government DPRD Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah, regional parliament, referring to the DKI parliament FY Financial Year GEF Global Environment Facility GHG Greenhouse Gas GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (German international cooperation) GoI Government of Indonesia IndII Indonesia Infrastructure Initiative ITDP Institute for Transportation and Development Policy Kemenhub Kementrian Perhubungan, Ministry of Transportation KPI Key Performance Indicator MRT Mass Rapid Transit (rail) M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MoF Ministry of Finance MoHA Ministry of Home Affairs MSS Minimum Service Standard MTE Mid-term evaluation NGO Non-government organisation NMT Non-motorised transport Pergub 123 Peraturan Gubernur nomor 123 tahun 2006, gubernatorial regulation on appointment of busway bus operators in DKI PIR Project Implementation Review ProDoc Project Document PT Perusahan Terbatas, limited company RPJMN Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Nasional, national medium term development plan RToC Reconstructed Theory of Change Satpol PP Satuan Polisi Pamong Praja, regional Law enforcement
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Owner Estimate for Urban Bus Services 2020
    OWNER ESTIMATE FOR URBAN BUS SERVICES 2020 1 Owner Estimate for Urban Bus Services A guideline for service providers/operators 2020 Author Dr. Okto Risdianto Manullang, ST., MT. Contact Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Dag-Hammarskjöld-Weg 1-5 65760 Eschborn Tel +49 (0) 6196 79-0 Fax +49 (0) 6196 79-11 15 www.giz.de Editors Ari Nova Firnanda Achmad Zacky Ambadar Maulana Ichsan Gituri Cover designer Nabila Fauzia Rahman DISCLAIMER The analysis, results, and recommendations in this paper represent the opinion of the author(s) and are not necessarily representative of the position of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH or BMUB. Partial or total reproduction of this document authorized for non-profit purposes provided the source is acknowledged. i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Government of Indonesia, through the Ministry of Transportation, has committed to provide support and assistance in the development of public transportation systems in all cities in Indonesia. It aims to provide incentives to local governments to immediately take the necessary actions to help accelerate public transport reform in their respective cities. To realize this, the calculation of vehicle operating costs (BOK) needed as an indicator of determining minimum tariffs or providing subsidies. The commonly used calculation methods in the calculation of vehicle operating costs refer to the Decree of Directorate General of Land Transportation and Transjakarta's calculation methods. Each of those calculation methods have advantages and disadvantages. The Decree of Directorate General of Land Transportation’s method has advantages in the right understanding of the calculation component. In contrast, Transjakarta’s method has advantages in practical worksheets and can provide comprehensive information.
    [Show full text]
  • Initiating Bus Rapid Transit in Jakarta, Indonesia
    Initiating Bus Rapid Transit in Jakarta, Indonesia John P. Ernst On February 1, 2004, a 12.9-km (8-mi) bus rapid transit (BRT) line began the more developed nations, the cities involved there frequently lack revenue operation in Jakarta, Indonesia. The BRT line has incorporated three critical characteristics more common to cities in developing most of the characteristics of BRT systems. The line was implemented in countries: only 9 months at a cost of less than US$1 million/km ($1.6 million/mi). Two additional lines are scheduled to begin operation in 2005 and triple 1. High population densities, the size of the BRT. While design shortcomings for the road surface and 2. Significant existing modal share of bus public transportation, terminals have impaired performance of the system, public reaction has and been positive. Travel time over the whole corridor has been reduced by 3. Financial constraints providing a strong political impetus to 59 min at peak hour. Average ridership is about 49,000/day at a flat fare reduce, eliminate, or prevent continuous subsidies for public transit of 30 cents. Furthermore, 20% of BRT riders have switched from private operation. motorized modes, and private bus operators have been supportive of expanding Jakarta’s BRT. Immediate improvements are needed in the These three characteristics combine to favor the development of areas of fiscal handling of revenues and reconfiguring of other bus routes. financially self-sustaining BRT systems that can operate without gov- The TransJakarta BRT is reducing transport emissions for Jakarta and ernment subsidy after initial government expenditures to reallocate providing an alternative to congested streets.
    [Show full text]
  • Kualitas Pelayanan Badan Layanan Umum Transjakarta Pada Penumpang Penyandang Cacat Fisik (Difabel)
    KUALITAS PELAYANAN BADAN LAYANAN UMUM TRANSJAKARTA PADA PENUMPANG PENYANDANG CACAT FISIK (DIFABEL) SKRIPSI diajukan untuk memenuhi salah satu syarat ujian sarjana strata-1 pada program studi administrasi negara Oleh: ZAHROTUL ADDAWIYAH ISKANDAR 072759 FAKULTAS ILMU SOSIAL DAN ILMU POLITIK UNIVERSITAS SULTAN AGENG TIRTAYASA SERANG 2011 ABSTRAK Zahrotul Addawiyah I, NIM 072759, Kualitas Pelayanan Badan Layanan Umum Transjakarta Pada Penumpang Penyandang Cacat Fisik (Difabel), program studi Ilmu Administrasi Negara, Fakultas Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik Universitas Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa, Serang 2011. Pembimbing I Maulana Yusuf, S, IP. Msi. Pembimbing II Kandung Sapto Nugroho, S.sos, M.si. Kata Kunci: Aksesibilitas, Penyandang Cacat Fisik, Transjakarta Fokus penelitian ini adalah kualitas pelayanan badan layanan umum transjakarta pada penumpang penyandang cacat fisik (difabel). Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui bagaimana kualitas pelayanan badan layanan umum transjakarta pada penumpang penyandang cacat fisik (difabel). Berdasarkan tujuan penelitian tersebut, maka metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian deskriptif kualitatif dengan menggunakan teknik purposive sampling dan snow ball sampling. Hasil penelitian menyimpulkan bahwa kualitas pelayanan badan layanan umum transjakarta pada penumpang penyandang cacat fisik (difabel) adalah tidak optimal. Hal ini dapat dilihat dari banyaknya petugas yang tidak mengamalkan sistem 4S (sapa, sopan, sabar, senyum) terhadap pelanggan transjakarta, infrastruktur yang tidak memadai bagi penyandang cacat fisik (difabel) seperti trotoar, jembatan penyebrangan, halte, adanya gap platform, dan audiovisual yang bobrok, headway yang sangat lama, tidak adanya pelatihan khusus bagi pegawai transjakarta dalam melayani penyandang cacat fisik (difabel), banyak fasilitas yang tidak terawat, kurangnya pengawasan pegawai transjakarta dan sulitnya melakukan pengaduan layanan, kurangnya sosialisasi program pemberdayaan transjakarta seperti temu pelanggan, wisata busway, park and ride busway.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Tariff Integration Between MRT and Transjakarta*
    Advances in Engineering Research, volume 193 2nd International Symposium on Transportation Studies in Developing Countries (ISTSDC 2019) Analysis of Tariff Integration Between MRT and TransJakarta* Kevin Ginevra Arota Hulu Andyka Kusuma Civil Engineering Department Civil Engineering Department University of Indonesia University of Indonesia Depok, Indonesia Depok, Indonesia [email protected] [email protected] Abstract—The Tariff Integration System is a tariff payment residents to reduce transportation cost. Tariff integration system where users of public transportation make payments allows passengers to use several transportation modalities only once but can use two or more modes of public by only buying one ticket, which can be used for a short transportation. For this study, the modes of transportation period or can also have seasonal validity [4]. Therefore, this reviewed are TransJakarta and MRT. The purpose of this study tries to find out what the people of Jakarta perceive study is to find out the preferences that affect the community regarding tariff integration, to know the factors that can about the tariff integration system. influence people's behaviour towards tariff integration, as well as the preference for integration rates for the community. The II. TARIFF INTEGRATION SYSTEM data collection method for this study is the Stated Preference Method. The survey conducted in two places, namely in the The Integration Tariff system allows passengers to use downtown and in the suburbs. The survey in the downtown is several transportation modalities (for example, intercity and held at the Bendungan Hilir Shelter (TransJakarta Corridor 1) city buses, subways, local trains, and ferries).
    [Show full text]
  • Social Impact of Railway Project A
    SOCIAL IMPACT OF RAILWAY PROJECT A CASE STUDY OF MASS RAPID TRANSIT (MRT) JAKARTA, INDONESIA DAMPAK SOSIAL PROYEK KERETA API STUDI KASUS MASS RAPID TRANSIT (MRT) JAKARTA, INDONESIA Listifadah Research and Development Land Transportation-Ministry of Transportation Jl. Medan Merdeka Timur No. 5 Jakarta Pusat 10110 email: [email protected] Diterima: 11 November 2014, Revisi 1: 1 Desember 2014, Revisi 2: 10 Desember 2014, Disetujui: 19 Desember 2014 ABSTRACT Jakarta MRT system had been planned since the 1980’s. Many constraints such as political, finan- cial, as well as bureaucratic make the project delayed for a long time. When the plan scheduled to be implemented in a couple years ago, some protests arise. Communities and some interest group against. The fears of income decline and loss of livelihood become their main concerns which in- duce protests before the project really started. Based on this experience, this paper tries to reveal social impacts of transport development in case MRT Jakarta. Now the project construction is being carried out. Social impact as well as the project construction continues. This study investigate how social impact of railway project was happened. Literatures and documents analysis was used to analyze this study. The result of the study were the MRT Jakarta project inevitably have negative and positive impacts both for society and environment. But with the start of the project after a long delay, it gives hope to the community for better transportation. It is a positive impact before the project was completed. Community engagement in a meeting or discusssion should more be em- phasized in the process in order to minimize the conflicts of interest.
    [Show full text]
  • The Demand for Public Transport: a Practical Guide
    The demand for public transport: a practical guide R Balcombe, TRL Limited (Editor) R Mackett, Centre for Transport Studies, University College London N Paulley, TRL Limited J Preston, Transport Studies Unit, University of Oxford J Shires, Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds H Titheridge, Centre for Transport Studies, University College London M Wardman, Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds P White, Transport Studies Group, University of Westminster TRL Report TRL593 First Published 2004 ISSN 0968-4107 Copyright TRL Limited 2004. This report has been produced by the contributory authors and published by TRL Limited as part of a project funded by EPSRC (Grants No GR/R18550/01, GR/R18567/01 and GR/R18574/01) and also supported by a number of other institutions as listed on the acknowledgements page. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the supporting and funding organisations TRL is committed to optimising energy efficiency, reducing waste and promoting recycling and re-use. In support of these environmental goals, this report has been printed on recycled paper, comprising 100% post-consumer waste, manufactured using a TCF (totally chlorine free) process. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The assistance of the following organisations is gratefully acknowledged: Arriva International Association of Public Transport (UITP) Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) Local Government Association (LGA) Confederation of Passenger Transport (CPT) National Express Group plc Department for Transport (DfT) Nexus Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Network Rail Council (EPSRC) Rees Jeffery Road Fund FirstGroup plc Stagecoach Group plc Go-Ahead Group plc Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) Greater Manchester Public Transport Transport for London (TfL) Executive (GMPTE) Travel West Midlands The Working Group coordinating the project consisted of the authors and Jonathan Pugh and Matthew Chivers of ATOC and David Harley, David Walmsley and Mark James of CPT.
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Rapid Transit Planning Guide
    Introduction Part I Project Preparation Part II Operational Design Part III Physical Design Part IV Integration 4Part V Business Plan Part VI Evaluation and Implementation Resources, Annexes, and References ������������������ �������������� ��������� Part V – Business Plan CHAPTER 15 CHAPTER 16 Business and institutional structure Operating costs and fares CHAPTER 17 CHAPTER 18 Financing Marketing Bus Rapid Transit - Planning Guide 2007 15. Business and institutional structure 4. Operator compensation based upon vehicle- kilometres travelled rather than number of “Whenever you see a successful business, some- passengers; one once made a courageous decision.” 5. Independently concessioned fare collection —Peter Drucker, educator and writer, 1909–2005 system that distributes revenues in a wholly transparent manner. The ultimate sustainability of the proposed BRT system is likely to depend as much on the Monopoly public bus operators and unregulated system’s “software” (the business and regulatory private operators both result in well known structure) as it is on the “hardware” (buses, problems that end up compromising the quality stations, busways, and other infrastructure). of the public transport service. While circum- stances will vary from case to case, there is an Ideally, the institutional structure of a BRT emerging consensus that some institutional and system should (roughly in order of priority): business structures work better than others. n Maximise the quality of the service over the long term; Well-designed business structures for BRT n Minimise the cost of the service over the long systems have tended to seek considerable com- term; petition for the market but limited competition n Maximise the level of private sector invest- in the market.
    [Show full text]
  • Youth Perception on Features and Accessibility of Bus Rapid Transit Mebidang in Bridging Interconnected Areas in North Sumatera
    International Journal of Research and Review www.ijrrjournal.com E-ISSN: 2349-9788; P-ISSN: 2454-2237 Research Paper Youth Perception on Features and Accessibility of Bus Rapid Transit Mebidang in Bridging Interconnected Areas in North Sumatera Yusuf Aulia Lubis, Sirojuzilam, Suwardi Lubis Regional Planning Department, School of Post-Graduate, University of Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia Corresponding Author: Yusuf Aulia Lubis ABSTRACT One of Indonesian problems in infrastructure development is how to nationally avail Bus Rapid Transit having transit rail system in its development system. In the macroeconomic perspective, the availability of urban transport infrastructure services can affect the marginal productivity of private capital, while in the microeconomic perspective; such services can also decrease production costs. Moreover, the contribution of urban transport infrastructure to improving quality of life is indicated by the increase in welfare, productivity and access to employment, as well as macroeconomic stability. This research is descriptive trying to gain youth’s perception on Bus Rapid Transit in Medan. In this study, the primary and secondary data sources are used and the populations include all users of Trans Mebidang. The samples are taken from those using the routes of Tanjug Anom to Down Town (or Pusat Kota), Jamin Ginting to Down Town, and Simpang Pos to Down Town and the samples chosen are only 15% of population. Sampling technique is purposive and accidental. It can be concluded that partially the Feature Perception (X1) gives impacts on the uutilization of Trans Mebidang and partially the Accessibility Perception also brings effect to the utilization of Trans Mebidang. Keywords: perception, features, accessibility, bus rapid transit, Medan INTRODUCTION Mamminasata).
    [Show full text]
  • Implementing Low Carbon Public Transport Carbon Public
    Implementing Low Carbon Public Transport in Jakarta Project RblE&ERenewable Energy & Energy Efficiency Project (REEEP) Project ID 108010494 Report 1 Technical Specification on Cleaner Fuel Buses for Direct Service March 2012 Table of Contents 1. BACKGROUND: DIRECT SERVICE CONCEPT 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Direct Service Concept 1.3 Fleet Type and Capacity 2. DEFINING SUITABLE FLEET FOR DIRECT SERVICE 2.1 Desired Vehicle Performance for Direct Service 222.2 Level of Emissions to be expected 3. FUEL TYPE : DIESEL or CNG? 3.1 The Benefit of Diesel 3.2 The Benefit of CNG 333.3 CbiiCombining the Two: CtiCreating A Sus ta ina ble Sys tem with Differen t Flee t AtArrangement 4. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION DESIGN FOR DIRECT SERVICE BUSES 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Condition of Existing buses 4.3 Chassis and Engine Technical Specification 4.4 Body and Interior Specification and Design 4.5 Equipment and Supporting Tools Specification 5. PROVIDING RELIABILITY IN RUNNING THE DIRECT SERVICE 5.1 The Need for Maintenance Contract: How the Contract Should be Arranged 5.2 Quality Control: How to supervise the Maintenance and Quality Checking 5.3 Monitoring and Evaluation as Part of Quality Control 6. FLEET RECOMMENDATION Implementing Low Carbon Public Transport in Jakarta Project 2 Chapter 1 Background : Direct Service Concept Implementing Low Carbon Public Transport in Jakarta Project 3 CHAPTER 1 1.1 Introduction Transjakarta, the first Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system in REEEP Project “Implementing Low Carbon Public Indonesia, started in 2004. As of February 2012 11 Transport in Jakarta” will outline plans and measures to Corridors, with 180 km long are in operation and served by be taken to implement the tranforming medium buses to 206 stations and 560 buses, 480 of which run on become Transjakarta Direct Service.
    [Show full text]
  • Electric Buses in Urban Transport—The Situation and Development Trends
    June 2014, Volume 2, No. 1 (Serial No. 2), pp. 45-58 Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering, ISSN 2328-2142, USA D DAVID PUBLISHING Electric Buses in Urban Transport—The Situation and Development Trends Jakub Slavík Self-employed business consultant, Říčany u Prahy 25101, Czech Republic Abstract: A study called “E-mobilita v MHD” (e-mobility in urban mass transit) has been conducted by the author’s private consultancy to inform Czech public transport operators about the technologies and operational experience to date and stimulate the e-bus utilization as well as their involvement in e-bus research and development projects. The study covers trolley-buses, diesel hybrids and e-buses including fuel cell buses. These electric urban buses have been compared with combustion engine vehicles represented by diesel and CNG (compressed natural gas) buses, in terms of energy consumption and cost, greenhouse gas emissions, noise and life cycle cost. Relations between urban transport e-mobility and the “smart grid” concept have been presented as well. Comprehensive reports prepared on the European Union and the USA levels have been the basis for the study, completed by information from the field research, focused especially on the bus operational reliability and other parameters important for a transport operator and covering, interalia, 12 case studies. The results show electric buses as a promising urban transport mode with massive technology development overcoming their operational limitations. Synergies between electric buses and other urban systems, such as power supply, are notable as well. Key words: Electric bus, trolley-bus, fuel cell bus, charging, urban transport.
    [Show full text]
  • Kota 45 2 Blok M APTB Sinar Jaya Dalam Kota Blok M
    TERMINAL BUS BLOK M Jenis Angkutan Jumlah No. Terminal Perusahaan No. Trayek Jurusan Antar Kota Dalam Kota Kendaraan 1 Blok M damri Dalam Kota Blok M - Kota 45 2 Blok M APTB Sinar Jaya Dalam Kota Blok M - Bogor 7 3 Blok M APTB Mayasari Dalam Kota Blok M - Cileungsi 7 4 Blok M Trans Jabodetabek Dalam Kota Blok M - Ciputat 9 5 Blok M damri Dalam Kota Blok M - Bandara Soeta 14 6 Blok M PPD R. 45 Dalam Kota Blok M - Cililitan 6 7 Blok M Mayasari Bakti R. 57 Dalam Kota Blok M - Puloadung 5 8 Blok M Mayasari Bakti 05 T Dalam Kota Blok M - Bekasi 10 9 Blok M Mayasari Bakti 05 B Dalam Kota Blok M - Bekasi 10 10 Blok M Mayasari Bakti 34 Dalam Kota Blok M - Cimone 10 11 Blok M Mayasari Bakti 121 Dalam Kota Blok M - Cikarang 7 12 Blok M AJA Putra 138 Dalam Kota Blok M - Tangerang 7 13 Blok M metromini S. 69 Dalam Kota Blok M - Ciledug 27 14 Blok M metromini S. 70 Dalam Kota Blok M - joglo 9 15 Blok M metromini S. 71 Dalam Kota Blok M - Bintaro 5 16 Blok M metromini S. 72 Dalam Kota Blok M - Lebak Bulus 9 17 Blok M metromini S. 74 Dalam Kota Blok M - Rempoa 10 18 Blok M metromini S. 75 Dalam Kota Blok M - Ps. Minggu 29 19 Blok M metromini S. 77 Dalam Kota Blok M - Ragunan 4 20 Blok M metromini S. 610 Dalam Kota Blok M - Pondok Labu 26 21 Blok M metromini S.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficiency Analysis of İzmir Metro in Its Current State MASTER of CITY PLANNING
    Efficiency Analysis of İzmir Metro in Its Current State By Ömer SELVİ A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate School in Partial Fulfillment to the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF CITY PLANNING Department: City and Regional Planning Major: City Planning İzmir Institute of Technology İzmir, Turkey September, 2002 We approve the thesis of Ömer SELVİ Date of Signature …………………………………… 19.09.2002 Assoc. Prof. Dr. Güneş GÜR Supervisor Department of City and Regional Planning …………………………………… 19.09.2002 Assist. Prof. Dr. Yavuz DUVARCI Department of City and Regional Planning …………………………………… 19.09.2002 Assoc. Prof. Dr. Özen EYÜCE Department of Architecture …………………………………… 19.09.2002 Prof. Dr. Akõn SÜEL Head of Department ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would express firstly great thanks to my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Güneş GÜR for having accepted me to prepare this master thesis. I would also thank to Assist. Prof. Dr. Yavuz DUVARCI for his theoretical support during the process of this study. I would express heartfelt thanks to my dearest Evrim GÜÇER who made a serious contribution and support while preparing the thesis. I am also in debt to Ali Kemal ÇINAR for computer support. I am deeply grateful to; İBŞB staff; Ilgaz CANDEMİR, Emre ORAL, Esin TÜRSEN and Orhan KESLER for their help to enable data access. Ömür SAYGIN for GIS database support. Rose GANDEE, information specialist of APTA, for sending books. Özgür İMRE for his help throughout printing process. Finally, I would like to thank to my fellow Mehmet BAŞOĞLU for his help in land survey. i ABSTRACT This thesis analyzes the efficiency of the current state of İzmir Metro System by using the Method of Comparative Benchmarking.
    [Show full text]