The document discusses feeder services as an important part of integrated public transport networks. It defines feeder services as buses that pick up passengers and transport them to transfer points to connect to trunk services like rail. Effective feeder services require consideration of origin-destination points, network connectivity, ease of transfers and fare pricing. Challenges include long wait times, inefficient routes and high costs that make conventional buses unsuitable as feeders. Solutions proposed include improving infrastructure at stations, optimizing route lengths and frequencies, and exploring new transport models like paratransit to enhance viability and connectivity of feeder services as part of the overall public transport system.

1. First – Last Mile : Feeder Services
Norma Nun
24 March 2014

2. • Vision and Targets Defined
• Setting the Path for LPT Transformation
• Implementing the Policy
Towards achieving :
• Increased mobility
• Economic growth and transformation
To Make Public Transport as the Rakyat’s (People’s)
Choice for Mobility
Greater KL :
 Modal share target of 25% by 2015 and 40% by 2020
National :
 Modal share target of 40% in urban areas by 2030
 Increased connectivity in rural areas

3. ▪ Target 40%
modal share
for public
transport in
the urban
areas by 2030
during AM
peak periods
▪ Increase PT
access in
Rural Areas
National Land Public Transport Master Plan
- Targets, Strategic Objectives and Policies
Physically well- connected1
Affordable and accessible to all
2
Convenient and offer high
service levels and quality
3
Safe and Secure
4
Better quality of life
5
▪ Enhance urban connectivity
▪ Enhance rural and inter-city connectivity
▪ Improve route-planning and explore alternative
models to ensure accessibility to the under-served
▪ Build sustainable land public transport models which
provide affordable services to public and financially
viable for operator
▪ Increase accessibility for the mobility impaired
▪ Raise service reliability of public transport
▪ Improve service standard for operators, drivers and
vehicles
▪ Develop seamless experience for the user
▪ Ensure high standards of safety and security for
operators
▪ Encourage and support safety initiatives
▪ Promote healthy living
▪ Manage travel demand
▪ Encourage environmental sustainability
▪ Optimize PT infrastructure
Strategic Objectives Key Policies (14)

4. What is First – Last Mile
First Mile Rail Last Mile
Trip
R R

5. What is First – Last Mile
Often PT is only one part of the passenger journey. Integration with other modes (other public
transport, private transport, walking and cycling) is important to maximise the potential usage
of PT. This can be referred to as the ‘first and last mile’.

6. What is First – Last Mile

7. Feeder Services
Strictly Confidential and for Internal Use Only
• Feeder bus services are designed to pick up passengers in a
locality and take them to a transfer point where they make an
onward journey on a trunk service.
• Trunk service can be another bus, or a rail based service such
as a tram, rapid transit or train.
• Feeder buses act as part of a wider local network, or a regional
network.
• Planning and design of feeder services requires understanding
of the existing origin-destination points, network
connectivity, ease of transfer from/to the feeder
service, competing alternatives, fare pricing, routing etc.

8. CHARATERISTICS – Feeder Services
Strictly Confidential and for Internal Use Only
Criteria of feeder bus services should be:
a) The service should be high-frequency
b) The route should be relatively direct and not meandering
c) Within 7km radius
d) Servicing residential/commercial areas from mainline /
trunks / rail
e) Providing first and last mile connectivity
f) Fare pricing due to competition with other modes

9. • Unreliable first-last mile connectivity
Will impacts the overall quality and usage of mass transit, resulting in a shift in
the mode share of public transport.
• Integration
While efforts need to be made to improve mass public transport, it is essential
to improve last mile connectivity and link these services into an integrated
system to aid ease of access for users.
• Poor quality
The challenges to effective, reliable and affordable last mile connectivity
solutions include poor quality, unorganised taxi services; and a lack of public
walking/bicycling services and infrastructure.
Last Mile Problems

10. Things to consider in delivering feeder services:
• The feeder solution is favoured because:
Comprehensive Local Transport Connections
– This system creates a more integrated network with better local travel opportunities
by the transfer of operating resources from parallel bus and rail operation to a more
economic division of roles between bus and rail.
Supports Rail System In Local Transport Coverage
– Feeder services are needed to make good use of the high capacity of the train system
and support high frequency services in the main corridors.
Frequent, useful-connectivity service
– A feeder service can often provide a more frequent and useful local service and thus
generate more local journeys if there is potential in the market.
• However, some possible disadvantage to consider:
Rail is faster, and cheaper in CBD than bus systems
– It is also pointed out that travel speed on rail is faster, more comfortable and more
reliable than buses on the main roads into the city centre, and that the upgrading of
the bus system in the corridors into the city centre is difficult and costly compared to
the operation of trains on segregated rights-of-way.
Transfer is disincentive
– The network effect may not be fully achieved for short journeys; the forced-need to
transfer is a substantial disincentive to use public transport.
Strictly Confidential and for Internal Use Only

11. Planning for Feeder Service
Guidelines DRAFT POLICY GUIDELINES FOR
PUBLIC TRANSPORT NETWORK PLANNING
3.5.3 ……… access by walking, bicycle, or
feeder bus, in order to cater for long term
growth patronage
3.5.5 Walking access mode to public
transport stops and interchanges must be seen
as part of the public transport system
3.5.6 It is recommended to design the
walking routes through interesting urban
streets or beautiful parks, green corridors or
natural environments. The more attractive the
route, the longer distances people are willing
to walk.
3.5.7 Access roads to the stops and on-the-
road information must be without barriers and
obstacles to wheel chairs, prams, those with
reduced walking ability and impaired sight.
3.5.8 All year maintenance of the pedestrian
network is required.

12. Challenges
Strictly Confidential and for Internal Use Only
Lack of proper infrastructure for feeder buses
• Station areas need to be organized with proper access to pedestrians by providing
walkways and cycle lanes
Inefficient feeder service
• Ideally feeder lengths should be 5-7 kms but have gone beyond 7-8 kms from the stations
in the recent times
• Number of feeder buses in operation lower than optimum whereby operator tries to
cover as much of the catchment area in the single route and single trip.
Not Cost-efficient
• Cost structure for conventional bus not viable for feeder service in residential areas
• Limited resources- Fleet/Personnel
Development pattern
• Pattern of Housing in GKLKV. Low density - link or terrace houses spread out for a
relatively large area

13. PERFORMANCE OF FEEDER BUS
Waiting time
Strictly Confidential and for Internal Use Only
Long Waiting Times
– 3 out of 10 journeys has waiting time less than the journey time
– 7 out of 10 journeys has waiting time same or exceed journey time
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
T505 U423 T309 T203 T421 T417 T323 T416 T431 T529
Waiting time (mins) In-vehicle journey time (mins)
Source: SPAD Spot Check Results

14. Strictly Confidential and for Internal Use Only
Long Route Lengths
– Average journeys has route lengths twice the direct journey by private car
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
T505 U423 T309 T203 T421 T417 T323 T416 T431 T529
Route Length (in km) Distance by car (in km)
PERFORMANCE OF FEEDER BUS
Route Length

15. Role of Urban Rail
• The main spine of the future PT network
• to provide links to the center of KL .i.e. primary corridor
demand
• Aim to increase PT capacity through enhancement to
existing lines, extensions to existing lines and the provision
of new routes
• The key link between the city to the airport
Feeder service key component of PT system especially in residential areas

16. Urban Rail Development Plan (URDP)
The Corridors

17. Bus Transformation Plan
Approach to Bus Master Plan Development
DETAILED DEMAND MODELLING
TRANSPORT PLANNING PRINCIPLES
2030 Bus M Plan:
• BRT on primary and
secondary corridors
• Local Bus Network
• Feeder Bus
Services
BUS MASTER PLAN

18. Strictly confidential and for internal use only.
Pillars - Greater KL/KV LPTMP
Elements of the 6 subsidiary plans …
E L E M E N T S O F T H E S U B S I D I A R Y P L A N S (1)
Urban Rail Development Plan (URDP)
Main spine of PT network
Provide increased PT capacity through enhancement to existing lines, extensions to existing lines and the
provision of new routes
The Projects:
 High Speed Rail (HSR) : Connecting 2 countries Malaysia – Singapore
 Mass Rapit Transit (MRT) : MRT 1 Sg Buloh – Kajang Line
 Upgrading KTM
 Extension LRT Kelana Jaya Line
 LRT 3 : Bandar Utama - Kelang
Bus Transformation Plan (BTP)
Support and feed
Feeder bus services to provide quick connection to primary and
secondary corridors and also provide local services to suburban centres
The Projects:
 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) : Klang to Kuala Lumpur & Sunway
 Go Kuala Lumpur
 Bus Network Rationalisation GO KL carrying more
than 10,000
passengers per day
Taxi Transformation Plan (TTP)
Filling the gaps & quality option
(door to door)
A high quality door to door service as a mode of choice for city centre trips where cost is not a deciding
factor
The Projects:
 Establish 1 Malaysia taxi Brand – Taxi Rakyat 1 Malaysia
(TR1MA)
 Driver training programme
 Central customer service centre
18

19. Strictly confidential and for internal use only.
Pillars - Greater KL/KV LPTMP
Elements of the 6 subsidiary plans …
E L E M E N T S O F T H E S U B S I D I A R Y P L A N S (2)
Interchange and Integration Plan (IIP)
Prepared by:
Policy, Planning &
Research Division
Version: Dec 2012
Review: Dec 2013
POLICY GUIDELINES FOR
INTERCHANGE AND
INTEGRATION
Coordinate transport and development together by creating places
that are well used and valued
Land Use Planning (LUP)
Travel Demand Management (TDM)
To encourage travel by more sustainable modes i.e. LPT and to reduce
reliance on private vehicle
Prepared by:
Policy, Planning &
Research Division
Version: Dec 2012
Review: Dec 2013
POLICY GUIDELINES FOR TRAVEL
DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM)
Seek to influence land use policies and planning process to favour
LPT provision and performance
Policy
Framework
Planning
Process
Reduce the barriers to
enable mode shift
Sustainable mode shift
Driving up LPT mode share
more aggressively
19
The Projects:
 Ticketing Integration
 Interchange and Integration guidelines
The Projects:
 Travel demand management (TDM) guidelines

20. • Provide the main spine of the
future PT network particularly
to provide links to the centre of
KL i.e. primary corridor demand
• Provide increased PT capacity
through enhancement to
existing lines, extensions to
existing lines and the provision
of new routes
• Provide the key link between
the city and KLIA
20
Role of Bus
• Fill in the gaps of rail
network, i.e. secondary corridor
demand including Bus Rapid
Transit where appropriate
• Feeder bus services to
provide quick connection
to primary and secondary
corridors
• Provide local services to
suburban centres
Role of Urban Rail Role of Taxi
• Provide a core public transport
service to those in outlying areas
outside the catchment of core and
feeder services;
• Provide a local service where
households have no car available and
bus does not meet their needs (for
example offering accessibility for the
mobility impaired, the transportation
of large packages or a local
destination off the bus route);
• Provide a service outside
conventional public transport
operation hours;
• A high quality door to door service as
a mode of choice for city centre trips
where cost is not a deciding factor;
Greater KL/KV Land PT Master Plan
Bus as Part of Integrated PTMP
Vision
to make PT the mode of choice for the public
The Spine Support & Feed 1. Filling the gaps
2. Quality Option – Door to
Door

21. 21
Policy
Framework
Planning
Process
Greater KL/KV Land PT Master Plan
Role of the subsidiary plans
▪ The ‘glue’ to join the PT
modes together
▪ Enable easier, quicker, more
convenient transfers
between services
▪ Create wider ranging and
more frequent travel
opportunities
Land Use2
Travel Demand
Management
▪ Complementary policy
instruments to the PTMP
▪ Seek to influence supply
and demand for PT
through policy
interventions
▪ To encourage travel by
more sustainable modes i.e.
PT and to reduce reliance
on private vehicle
3
S0
D0
ECONOMIC
PRICE→
QUANTITY
→
SUPPLY AND
DEMAND FOR
PT SERVICES
DI
Q0
P0
▪ Developing mechanisms to
influence land use policy
and planning framework
▪ Seek to influence land use
policies and planning
process to favour PT
provision and performance
▪ To give priority and
incentives to ‘pro-PT’
development while
‘manage’ development with
no good PT provision
Interchange & Integration1
O O D
from door to door
Public
Transport
Public
Transport
First mile
• Walk
• Park & ride
• Pick-up / drop-off point
Last mile
• Walk
BUS and/or
RAIL
D

22. Source : 2014 GKL LPT Survey; SPAD
Reason for using Public Transport
46% 45% 42% 33% 26% 12%
Cheaper than
driving
Avoid rush hours
traffic
Unavailability
of parking
Station near
house / office
No driving
license
Do not own
private vehicle
Do not own private vehicle (54%)
Station near house / office (47%)
Station near house / office (56%)
Unavailability of parking (59%)
Do not own private vehicle (53%)
Unavailability of parking (59%)
Top reason for
using most
often used
public
transport
Main reason for using public transport is because of convenience – there are stations near users house / office
and no need to worry about parking issue. Bus (RapidKL and Metrobus) users however have different reasons.

24. Planning for Feeder Service
MRT : Sungai Buloh – Kajang Line

26. OPTIONS FOR IMPROVING FIRST MILE CONNECTIVITY
– NLPTMP Recommendations
1. Enhance Park-and-Ride
– Avoids all first-mile issues from house to train station
– To be norm for all train stations. Exceptions to be justified
– Best to be analysed at the Railway Scheme under facilities
provision
– Land availability at stations may be a constraint to providing
sufficient park-and-ride facilities
2. Enhance Use of Bicycles for first-mile services
– Avoids all first-mile issues from house to train station
– To be norm for all train stations. Exceptions to be justified
– Best to be analysed at the Railway Scheme under facilities
provision
– Practised in advanced countries e.g. Tokyo, Velib scheme in
Paris
3. Use New Generation Paratransit for Feeder Services
– Addresses financial viability issues of conventional buses
– Better potential to provide short headways and short travel
distance feeder service
– Being piloted in advanced countries for urban freight delivery
Strictly Confidential and for Internal Use Only

27. Summary
Strictly Confidential and for Internal Use Only
• Feeder bus service is an integral part of mass transit system of a city
together with cycling and walking
• Provide first and last mile connectivity
• Proper planning needs to be done to ensure safe and reliable
movement of passengers
• Need for better integration between feeder services and destination
nodes
Rail acts as Spine of the
overall Transit System
Feeder Buses Complement
Transit System
Provision of walking and
cycling facilities crucial in
attracting transit users and
shift to PT

28. THANK YOU