Conferencia sobre Seguridad en transporte pblico y CETRAM

F
L
O
C
K
T
R
A
C
K
E
R
Mobility Futures Collaborative Urban Launchpad mexico
!"#$%& () *% +,%#- *%. (/)0
!"#$#%#& ()( *+,-."& /#0&
*121 "+ 21 31+04561 +.
/21.+1%#7. 8 /&264#%10 3+45&9&2#41.10
))1// 2!
!"#$ &"''( !"#
$%&!
$%&!
)#$*+, -#,+$.*#
/0'"01 2#3+$#
Conferencia sobre Seguridad en transporte pblico y CETRAM
F
L
O
C
K
T
R
A
C
K
E
R
Presentation Goals
Present the story of our research in Mexico City on CETRAMs
Demonstrate how the application played a role in improving methodology
Show how the application functions
Inspire new uses from students, such as those at UAM
Objetivos de la Presentacin
Presentar la historia de nuestra investigacin en la Ciudad de Mxico en CETRAMs
Demostrar cmo la aplicacin tuvo un papel en la mejora de la metodologa
Mostrar cmo funciona la aplicacin
Inspirar a los nuevos usos de los estudiantes, como los que de la UAM
ITDP
MXC OUTLINE
Components
Introduction and Motivation


Context

Research Questions and Method


Results



Conclusions



MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC OUTLINE
Components
Introduction and Motivation
1. Introduction
2. Research Background
Context
3. Research Context
Research Questions and Method
4. Research Questions
5. Research Method
Results
6. Initial Results
7. Outcome of Interest
8. Analysis
Conclusions
9. Conclusions
10. Further Thoughts
11. Questions
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC PART ONE
INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION + MOTIVATION
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC PURPOSE
Examining public transit in Mexico City
Does enhancing transit station infrastructure and services have an efect on users
perceptions of security on the system?
Specically, what are the efects of intermodal stations?
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC PART TWO
RESEARCH
BACKGROUND
INTRODUCTION + MOTIVATION
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC GREATER CONTEXT
Explosion of Data
Much interest in smart cities and role of ICT technologies
for planning and managing infrastructure and services
Focus on big data, such as broad usage patterns
observable by sensing mobile phone traces passive use
of traces
Can we use the smartphone to improve knowledge at a
small (high resolution) scale purposeful use of devices
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC MEXICO AS AN OPPORTUNITY
MISTI Global Seed Grant
MISTI
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC MEXICO AS AN OPPORTUNITY
MISTI Global Seed Grant
MISTI
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC LOCAL PARTNERS
!"#$% '()$%*(
!"#$#
MXC
2.0
M
exico City
Bus Tracker
M
exico City
Bus Tracker
ITDP
MXC LOCAL PARTNERS
Partner Interests
Explore data collection methods, particularly more efcient, smartphone-based alternatives
Address concerns of unreliable data that is typically produced during transportation analyses
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC DEVICE AS AN URBAN MAGNIFYING GLASS
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC DEVICE AS AN URBAN MAGNIFYING GLASS
Is this useful?
Can mobile technologies
help us diagnose the city?
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC BROAD SCOPE OF SECURITY IN MEXICO
Chevigny, P., 1995; Shelley, Louise, 2001; Rios and Shirk, 2011
Image credit: Flickr user AgentSmith6
Mexico
A rst test opportunity with dominant, well-documented urban issues; primarily, personal security.
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC PART THREE
CONTEXT
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC SITE SELECTION
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC SITE SELECTION
Width
30 km
Sistema de Transporte Colectivo
Jurisdictional Issues
Fractional division
Inconsistent authorities
Diferent police (quality)
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC SITE SELECTION
Sistema de Transporte Colectivo
MXC
2.0
Within a 5km radius of the CETRAM
Density of 995 persons per acre
62% of pop. between 15 and 65 years old
Middle to lower income households:
39% of workers earn less USD$23.00 per day
39% of workforce in commerce and services
12% of workforce in industry
Predominantly industrial zones, though there is a shift
towards services in recent years
2 large housing complexes in close proximity
Large student presence at the site, due to nearby technical
high schools
Campus Azcapotalco of Universidad Metropolitana
ITDP
MXC
Demographics for Ecatepec
Ecatepec is the major urban area around the CETRAM site
Large population center: 1,658,806 persons
Density of 643 persons per square acre
63.6% of population is older than 15 years old
Relatively more poor than El Rosarios site
Only 5% of the population exceed an income of $23.00 per
day
Adjacent to Multiplaza Aragon, one of the largest
shopping centers in Mexico City
First opened in 1971, the mall attracts millions of shoppers
every year
AREA DESCRIPTORS
Census Data of INEGI Censo de poblacin y vivienda
2010.
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC CETRAM FUNCTION
CETRAM
Centers of Modal
Transference
The Secretary of
Transportation and Roads
(SETRAVI), denes these
sites as physical spaces
that form part of the road
infrastructure where
diverse modes of
passenger ground
transport (individual,
collective, and large) come
together to facilitate the
transfer of people from one
mode to another.
Juan Martinez Vasquez. Propuesta
de un Modelo de Calidad de
Servicio para el Transporte Pblico
Metrobs. January 2010.
MXC
2.0
CETRAM
Construction began in 1969
Designed as complementary
to the Metro terminals
Until 1993, operated by the
System of Collective Transport
Operated by corresponding
political delegation until 90s
Then, administration and
control was transferred to the
next General Coordination of
Transport
Current responsibility is
fractured amongst a number
of organizations; SETRAVI
responsible for the most
heavily used
Vasquez, Juan. Analises de los
Centros de Transferencia
Estrategicas en el Distrito Federal.
Instituto Politecnico Nacoional.
Centro de Investigacion e
Innovacion Tecnologica. 2010.
ITDP
MXC CETRAM FUNCTION
MXC
2.0
CETRAM
Developments are typically
public-private concessions
with, for example, 30-year
concessions on recent
project sites for companies
to receive a return on their
investments.
Contain concentrated daily-
goods services to maximize
efectiveness of transit-
based trips and enable the
Metro to become a feasible
travel alternative.
Informal economies
support an estimates
22,000 families.
Juan Martinez Vasquez. Propuesta
de un Modelo de Calidad de
Servicio para el Transporte Pblico
Metrobs. January 2010.
ITDP
MXC CETRAM FUNCTION
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC CORE COMPONENTS
Model: Architects CC, 2013
Juan Martinez Vasquez. Propuesta de un Modelo de Calidad
de Servicio para el Transporte Pblico Metrobs. January 2010.
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC
Model: Architects CC, 2013
Juan Martinez Vasquez. Propuesta de un Modelo de Calidad
de Servicio para el Transporte Pblico Metrobs. January 2010.
CORE COMPONENTS
Cuatro Caminos
CETRAM Site
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC
Model: Architects CC, 2013
Juan Martinez Vasquez. Propuesta de un Modelo de Calidad
de Servicio para el Transporte Pblico Metrobs. January 2010.
CORE COMPONENTS
Modal Transfer
Zone
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC
Model: Architects CC, 2013
Juan Martinez Vasquez. Propuesta de un Modelo de Calidad
de Servicio para el Transporte Pblico Metrobs. January 2010.
CORE COMPONENTS
Metroplaza
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC CETRAM FUNCTION
CETRAM
Three common goals of
redevelopment at sites:
1. Increase travel efciency
by optimizing on-site ows
and commuter transfers.
2. Address security issues
on-site (often through
substantial video
surveillance and private
security implementation).
3. Organize informal
commerce at site, thus
assisting to address above
concerns.
BBVA Bancomer. Memorando
Informativo. January 2008.
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC TRAVEL EFFICIENCY
Los tiempos de espera en los sitios de estaciones deben ser
los mnimos posibles, as como los intervalos de
desplazamientos en los medios de transporte.
Goal: Minimize wait times and headways
Increase travel efciency by optimizing on-site ows and
commuter transfers.
El servicio de transporte pblico debe ser continuo, regular,
continuo, uniforme, permanente, ininterrumpido y suciente,
para satisfacer las necesidades Evaluacin del diseo e
instrumentacin de la poltica de transporte pblico colectivo
de pasajeros en el Distrito Federal
Goal: Maintain regularized services and structures
Evalua DF, 2011.
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC CETRAM SECURITY
Las personas tienen el derecho de transportarse con
seguridad para sus vidas... [Es] la obligacin por parte de los
Estados de garantizar la mxima proteccin de las
instalaciones de transporte colectivo de pasajeros,
procurando minimizar los riesgos por la comisin de delitos
graves como, atentados terroristas, asaltos, robos, acoso
sexual y todo aquel que pueda suscitarse en los sitios... En
especial deber darse un trato prioritario a las mujeres para
salvaguardar su integridad fsica y moral.
Goal: State must ensure maximum protection at facilities
Goal: Minimize the risks of serious crimes as terrorist
attacks, assaults, robberies, sexual harassment, etc.
Goal: Priority made to safeguarding women
Addressing security issues on site.
Evalua DF, 2011.
MXC
2.0
ITDP
MXC CETRAM LOCATION
Mexico City, D.F.
State of Mexico
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC CETRAM RELATIONSHIP
Mexico City, D.F.
State of Mexico
45
44
46
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC CETRAM OVERVIEW
39/46
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC CETRAM OVERVIEW
39/46
Estimated 44.55% of all
daily trips that took place
in 2007 were on collective
transit vehicles.
Mara Luisa Flores Ramrez, 2012;
Mantilla, Bernardo Jose Ortiz, 2005
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC CETRAM OVERVIEW
Regional Impact
Cover over 80 hectares
32 km of bays, sheds, and commercial zones
Service roughly 7 million passengers per day
50% through just 5 CETRAMs
El Rosario is one, with 8% of all CETRAM transit
31,975 public vehicles
23,000 estimated other transit units
45% of these originate from the State of Mexico
In total, are the most-used transit facilities in Mexico City
But most, to this day, remain over-extended parking lots
Vsquez, Juan Martnez. 2010;
Mantilla, Bernardo Jose Ortiz.
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SITE SELECTION
El Rosario
Regions:
Azcapotzalco
Atizapan
Daily ow:
180,000+ persons
Estimated Vehicle Service:
10,000 trips per day
Total Area:
70,000 sq. meters
Amenities:
Commercial retail
Local government services
Medical clinic (pending)
Ciudad Azteca
(Mexipuerto)
Regions:
Ecatepec
Los Heroes Tecamec
Daily ow:
110,000 - 114,000 persons
Estimated Vehicle Service:
10,000 trips per day
Total Area:
75,473 sq. meters
Amenities:
Commercial retail
Medical clinic
RFID vehicle monitoring
Impulsora del Desarrollo y el Empleo en
America Latina
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC ARCHITECTURAL DIFFERENCES
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC ARCHITECTURAL DIFFERENCES
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC PART FOUR
RESEARCH QUESTION
RESEARCH QUESTIONS + METHOD
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC OPERATING QUESTION
IS SECURITY A
(CETRAM)?
Can intermodal stations have an efect on enhancing security
perception at a broader scale within the transit system?
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC DEFINING SECURITY
Targeted Concept of Security
Security as measured through ones perception of personal security in a given urban
environment. This is security as considered through fear of physical violence, crime, or
other social intimidation.
Not trafc safety - this distinction and the researchs intent was made explicit throughout
the entire process to all participants.
Davis, Diane E. Zero-Tolerance Policing, Stealth Real Estate Development, and the Transformation of Public Space:
Evidence from Mexico City Latin American Perspectives. March 2013. Volume 20, Number 2. Pages 53-76
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC DEFINING SECURITY
Four Key Elements
Urban form Built environment as a component of perceived personal security
Transit Elements of mode that increase or decrease perceived security, robberies
Sociodemographic Gender component of safety, as well as age and income efects
Privatization of urban space Distance components in relation to nodes
Davis, Diane E.; Muller, Markus-Michael, Piccato, Pablo; Vasquez, Juan Martinez.
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC EXISTING CONDITIONS
From outsized parking lot to order?
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC REDEVELOPED CONDITIONS
From outsized parking lot to order?
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC PART FIVE
RESEARCH METHOD
RESEARCH QUESTIONS + METHOD
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC RESEARCH TARGET
Logic of target mode choice
Most vulnerable vehicles at site would exhibit greatest variance
Any CETRAM impact would be more discernible amongst these
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC RESEARCH TARGET
Logic of target mode choice
Simply the most use mode of transport n Mexico City
Thus understanding them allows for biggest slice
INEGI, Encuesta Origen Destino para la Zona Metropolitana del
Valle de Mexico 2007
2007 Mode Split in Mexico City
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC VEHICLE TYPES
Pesero Minibus / VW
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC DETERMINE CETRAM IMPACT
CETRAM
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SPATIALITY
CETRAM
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC RFID IMPACT ON SPATIALITY
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC
Distance from CETRAM
F
e
e
l
i
n
g
s

o
f

I
n
s
e
c
u
r
i
t
y
DETERMINE CETRAM IMPACT
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC COMPONENTS OF DYNAMIC MEASURE
12-Question Survey
Age
Education
Companions
Origin
Destination
Trip Purpose
Mode Security
Point Security
Importance of Security
Most Secure Mode
Least Secure Mode
RFID Awareness
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC VOLUNTEER TRAINING
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC COMPONENTS OF DYNAMIC MEASURE
!"#$% '()$%*(
!"#$#
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC COMPONENTS OF DYNAMIC MEASURE
Trip Statistics
Geospatial
Timestamp
Riders + Sex
Perception
Security 1-5
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SAMPLING APPROACH
Surveyors grouped into teams
of two, when in eld.
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SAMPLING APPROACH
All willing participants surveyed
in vehicle, time permitting.
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC TEAM COMPOSITION
MIT + UNAM (National Autonomous University of Mexico)
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC VOLUNTEER MONITORING
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC ROUTE SELECTION
Survey Strategy
On and of-peak periods in 3-hour shifts
One week of surveying total
13-15 km 15-17 km
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC PART SIX
RESULTS
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
Volunteer Hours
Volunteer shifts ran roughly 3.5 hours in total.
Volunteers were extremely charitable with their time.
Given an average of 7-8 volunteers a day and 2-3
research members per station per day, we
accumulated roughly 650 hours of riding and survey
time, total. This was, on average, 90 hours per day.
650
RSA
MXC TIME INVESTMENT
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
Total Weeks of Riding Time
Volunteer shifts, cumulatively, equated to roughly one
quarter of a year of riding the bus. That is, if one were
to the ride the bus, regularly, for forty hours a week
for 16 and one quarter weeks in a row, one would
accumulate the equivalent information, in hours.
16.3
RSA
MXC TIME INVESTMENT
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
cleaned data points along the four routes
10,977
RSA
MXC FIGURES
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
surveys for both stations, combined
1,528
RSA
MXC FIGURES
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
OUTCOME
OF INTEREST
RSA
MXC PART SEVEN
RESULTS
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SPEED STATISTICS
RED
0 - 10
10 - 20
> 20 km
GREEN
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC IMPORTANCE OF SECURITY
84.5% + 8.7% = 93.2%
5
is most
important
4
is
important
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC POINT SECURITY VARIABLE
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC POINT SECURITY VARIABLE
GIS graphic developed by Liqun Chen.
Mexipuerto
Secure
Perception
of Security
Insecure
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC POINT SECURITY VARIABLE
GIS graphic developed by Liqun Chen.
El Rosario
Secure
Perception
of Security
Insecure
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
MULTIVARIATE
ANALYSIS
RSA
MXC PART EIGHT
RESULTS
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC COMPONENT VARIABLE SUMMARY
Model Attributes List
Inside or Outside Route
Euclidean Distance
Specic CETRAM study site
Peak or Of-Peak
Vehicle Type, Bus or Van
Urban Environment Morphology
Gender
Age
Educational Attainment
Number of Companions
Point Safety Perception
Knowledge of RFID Chip
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC COMPONENT VARIABLE SUMMARY
Basic Trip Descriptors
Inside or Outside Route
Euclidean Distance
Specic CETRAM study site
Peak or Of-Peak
Vehicle Type, Peseros or Minibus
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC COMPONENT VARIABLE SUMMARY
Environmental Descriptors
Urban Environment Morphology
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC COMPONENT VARIABLE SUMMARY
Participant Descriptors
Gender
Age
Educational Attainment
Number of Companions
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC COMPONENT VARIABLE SUMMARY
Participant Perception
Point Security Perception
Knowledge of RFID Chip
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC MODEL FORMULATION
Raw Model Output
Ordered logit
12-variable model
Va!uo Std. Lrror t va!uo p va!uo
1ns1do O.42862698 O.29672878 1.449O786 7.866788oO2
ouo!1doand1stanoo O.O1796482 O.O1788916 1.O86O848 1.6OO814oO1
ondorfoma!o O.288866O9 O.1166O71O 2.48488O8 7.468646oO8
aoO17 2.O8847O47 O.84O414O9 6.12O4OO1 4.667O88o1O
ao1824 1.78O96876 O.2981O127 6.9748749 1.16487OoO9
ao26.44 1.72469O66 O.28878887 6.O781979 6.O77O84o1O
ao4664 1.68666446 O.2986O627 6.2866O81 8.226688oO8
oapr1mar1a O.42O6O287 O.2484O126 1.6928872 4.624828oO2
oasooundar1a O.86188446 2.2O711977 O.1687181 4.849786oO1
oaproparator1a O.28786886 O.146461OO 1.62O7782 6.268816oO2
oa!1oono1atura O.14621726 O.16676818 O.8768487 1.9O2844oO1
oompan1onsmas 1.O4826887 O.66221766 1.89827O6 2.888O22oO2
OLTRAMMox1puorto 1.79611878 O.898O4491 4.6697419 2.441626oO6
poak O.O6449968 O.12O428O2 O.4626499 8.264866oO1
vohtypovan 1.11286816 O.29687868 8.7676812 8.241846oO6
rf1dop1n1onnoso 1.OO287261 O.28866684 4.2OOO682 1.884282oO6
rf1dop1n1on1 O.O9288862 O.48211666 O.2186894 4.168946oO1
rf1dop1n1on2 O.2468O886 O.68697628 O.8872868 8.492726oO1
rf1dop1n1on8 O.6198O9OO O.26116867 2.8788O48 8.814867oO8
rf1dop1n1on4 1.188498O8 O.8187278O 8.6668O46 1.88O641oO4
ut1 1.869727O8 O.88O6224O 8.6788167 1.76244OoO4
ut2 O.84866728 O.28786797 2.98O8968 1.69266OoO8
ut8 1.26O44988 O.471O7799 2.6766712 8.728988oO8
ut4 1.26689624 O.68619826 2.8484666 9.426446oO8
ut6 O.86149848 O.8O789O92 1.1484789 1.26421OoO1
ut6 O.768887O1 O.2972292O 2.6618648 6.866269oO8
ut7 O.8O988894 O.44866476 1.8O4O861 8.66129OoO2
ut9 O.8984O781 O.88O67898 2.8468798 9.466681oO8
rosar1oohook O.O4889419 O.O8861O97 1.1897889 1.271882oO1
mp1ns1do O.62617184 O.84179978 1.8819829 8.847699oO2
O|1 O.66O61986 O.46272641 1.4O6O6O4 7.98681OoO2
1|2 1.9841OOO6 O.46799972 4.1826949 1.792672oO6
2|8 2.66279864 O.46998219 6.462969O 2.476924oO8
8|4 4.OO727896 O.47694649 8.4196O7O 1.888746o17
4|6 6.6216818O O.484624O8 11.898741O 2.246886o8O
+
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
+
++
+++
+++
+++
++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
+++
++
+
+++
+++
+++
+++
Probab1!1ty p for mak1n orrors for tho nu!! hypothos1s`
p O.1O = +
p O.O6 = ++
p O.O1 = +++
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC MODEL FORMULATION
1. Location of route inside or outside of CETRAM
2. Euclidean distance from CETRAM site
3. Gender of survey participant
4. Age of survey participant
5. Educational attainment level of survey participant
6. Number of companions present on journey
7. Denotes if site of study is El Rosario or Mexipuerto
8. Denotes if time of survey is during peak or of-peak
9. Mode type, vehicle or pedestrian
10. Knowledge and opinion of RFID chip system
11. Urban environment typology
12. Rosario distance check variable.
13. Factor of inside and at Mexipuerto
Va!uo Std. Lrror t va!uo p va!uo
1ns1do O.42862698 O.29672878 1.449O786 7.866788oO2
ouo!1doand1stanoo O.O1796482 O.O1788916 1.O86O848 1.6OO814oO1
ondorfoma!o O.288866O9 O.1166O71O 2.48488O8 7.468646oO8
aoO17 2.O8847O47 O.84O414O9 6.12O4OO1 4.667O88o1O
ao1824 1.78O96876 O.2981O127 6.9748749 1.16487OoO9
ao26.44 1.72469O66 O.28878887 6.O781979 6.O77O84o1O
ao4664 1.68666446 O.2986O627 6.2866O81 8.226688oO8
oapr1mar1a O.42O6O287 O.2484O126 1.6928872 4.624828oO2
oasooundar1a O.86188446 2.2O711977 O.1687181 4.849786oO1
oaproparator1a O.28786886 O.146461OO 1.62O7782 6.268816oO2
oa!1oono1atura O.14621726 O.16676818 O.8768487 1.9O2844oO1
oompan1onsmas 1.O4826887 O.66221766 1.89827O6 2.888O22oO2
OLTRAMMox1puorto 1.79611878 O.898O4491 4.6697419 2.441626oO6
poak O.O6449968 O.12O428O2 O.4626499 8.264866oO1
vohtypovan 1.11286816 O.29687868 8.7676812 8.241846oO6
rf1dop1n1onnoso 1.OO287261 O.28866684 4.2OOO682 1.884282oO6
rf1dop1n1on1 O.O9288862 O.48211666 O.2186894 4.168946oO1
rf1dop1n1on2 O.2468O886 O.68697628 O.8872868 8.492726oO1
rf1dop1n1on8 O.6198O9OO O.26116867 2.8788O48 8.814867oO8
rf1dop1n1on4 1.188498O8 O.8187278O 8.6668O46 1.88O641oO4
ut1 1.869727O8 O.88O6224O 8.6788167 1.76244OoO4
ut2 O.84866728 O.28786797 2.98O8968 1.69266OoO8
ut8 1.26O44988 O.471O7799 2.6766712 8.728988oO8
ut4 1.26689624 O.68619826 2.8484666 9.426446oO8
ut6 O.86149848 O.8O789O92 1.1484789 1.26421OoO1
ut6 O.768887O1 O.2972292O 2.6618648 6.866269oO8
ut7 O.8O988894 O.44866476 1.8O4O861 8.66129OoO2
ut9 O.8984O781 O.88O67898 2.8468798 9.466681oO8
rosar1oohook O.O4889419 O.O8861O97 1.1897889 1.271882oO1
mp1ns1do O.62617184 O.84179978 1.8819829 8.847699oO2
O|1 O.66O61986 O.46272641 1.4O6O6O4 7.98681OoO2
1|2 1.9841OOO6 O.46799972 4.1826949 1.792672oO6
2|8 2.66279864 O.46998219 6.462969O 2.476924oO8
8|4 4.OO727896 O.47694649 8.4196O7O 1.888746o17
4|6 6.6216818O O.484624O8 11.898741O 2.246886o8O
+
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
+
++
+++
+++
+++
++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
+++
++
+++
++
+
+++
+++
+++
+++
Probab1!1ty p for mak1n orrors for tho nu!! hypothos1s`
p O.1O = +
p O.O6 = ++
p O.O1 = +++
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
Route operation within CETRAM
Route operation without CETRAM
Euclidean distance from CETRAM
Female
Male
Age 0-17
Age 18-24
Age 25-44
Age 45-64
Age 65+
Primary
Secondary
Preparatory
Licentiate
Masters and Doctoral
No companions
1-2 companions
3-4 companions
More than 4 companions
Inside operations at Mexipuerto
RSA
MXC MODEL FORMULATION
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.428 O.296 1.449 +
O.O17 O.O17 1.O86
O.288 O.117 2.48O +++
2.O88 O.84O 6.12O +++
1.781 O.298 6.974 +++
1.724 O.284 6.O78 +++
1.687 O.298 6.286 +++
O.42O O.249 1.698 ++
O.861 2.2O7 O.164
O.287 O.147 1.621 +
O.146 O.167 O.877
1.O48 O.662 1.898 ++
O.626 O.842 1.882 ++
CETRAM Mexipuerto
CETRAM El Rosario
Peak
Of-peak
Minibus vehicle type
Peseros vehicle type
No knowledge of RFID
RFID impact on safety level 1
RFID impact on safety level 2
RFID impact on safety level 3
RFID impact on safety level 4
RFID impact on safety level 5
Immediate CETRAM site
Neighborhood
Commercial shopping
Broadway pedestrian-friendly
Broadway auto-oriented
Expressway
Industrial
Road pedestrian-friendly
Road auto-oriented
Rosario distance variable
Va!uo SL Tva!
1.796 O.898 4.669 +++
O.O64 O.12O O.468
1.118 O.296 8.767 +++
1.OO2 O.289 4.2OO +++
O.O92 O.482 O.214
O.246 O.686 O.887
O.62O O.261 2.878 ++
1.188 O.819 8.666 +++
1.869 O.88O 8.678 +++
O.848 O.288 2.98O +++
1.26O O.471 2.676 +++
1.267 O.686 2.848 +++
O.861 O.8O8 1.148
O.768 O.297 2.661 +++
O.8O9 O.449 1.8O4 +++
O.898 O.881 2.847 +++
O.O44 O.O89 1.189
1018 Observations (pedestrian-based surveys omitted)
Pseudo r-squared: 0.0719
p O.1O = +
p O.O6 = ++
p O.O1 = +++
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC ROUTE LOCATION
Location of route at or outside CETRAM.
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.428 O.296 1.449
+
Inside operations at Mexipuerto.
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.626 O.842 1.882
++
Route operation within CETRAM
Route operation without CETRAM
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC EUCLIDEAN DISTANCE
Euclidean distance from CETRAM site
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.O17 O.O17 1.O86
Mexipuerto
Why Euclidean Distance?
If individuals feel safe when they board,
Can we observe a rate of decay?
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC EUCLIDEAN DISTANCE
Secure
Perception
of Security
Insecure
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC EUCLIDEAN DISTANCE
Euclidean distance
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.O17 O.O17 1.O86
El Rosario
Ridge Conditions
Infrastructural components of urban
environment create pockets of reference
Ridge-like conditions occur that create swells
of high and low perception levels, hindering
spillover to specic zones
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC EUCLIDEAN DISTANCE
Secure
Perception
of Security
Insecure
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC DATA
Vasconcellos 2001, 2003; Mitra-Sarkar and
Partheeban, 2011; Peters 2001; Tanzarn 2008;
Pardo, Carlos. F, Ob.cit., p. 278, Evalua DF 2011
Gender of survey participant
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.288 O.117 2.48 +++
Age of survey participant
Va!uo SL Tva!
2.O88 O.84O 6.12O +++
1.781 O.298 6.974 +++
1.724 O.284 6.O78 +++
1.687 O.298 6.286 +++
Educational attainment level
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.42O O.249 1.698 ++
O.861 2.2O7 O.164
O.287 O.147 1.621 +
O.146 O.167 O.877
Age 0-17
Age 18-24
Age 25-44
Age 45-64
Age 65+
Female
Male
Primary
Secondary
Preparatory
Licenciate
Masters +
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC DATA
Gender of survey participant
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.288 O.117 2.48 +++ Female
Male
STC Metro, 2010; Inmujeres DF, 2011.
Cause of complaint Count
Cases of sexual abuse 761
Cases of other violence 78
Cases of rape committed outside subway 11
Total cases observed 850
Only 283 cases were addressed
95% of the victims were women
2010 Incident Report Metro system only
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC DESCRIPTIVE TRIP-BASED DATA
Number of companions present on journey
Va!uo SL Tva!
1.O48 O.662 1.898
++
No companions
1-2 companions
3-4 companions
More than 4 companions
Generally safer perception when in groups of less than ve
Strange result could be the result of large groups attracting attention
Groups in such large numbers might be engaged in unsavory activities
Particularly large groups of students loitering
Lying because nervous re: surveyor
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC DESCRIPTIVE TRIP-BASED DATA
Denotes study site is El Rosario or Mexipuerto
Va!uo SL Tva!
1.796 O.898 4.669
+++
CETRAM Mexipuerto
CETRAM El Rosario
Inside operations at Mexipuerto.
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.626 O.842 1.882
++
Rosario distance product
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.O44 O.O89 1.189
Mexipuerto tends to be in a less safe neighborhood
Although less safe regionally, site operations are signicantly impactful
Variable produced by the product of Inside and Mexipuerto location
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC DESCRIPTIVE TRIP-BASED DATA
Peak or of-peak period
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.O64 O.12O O.468
Peak
Of-peak
No signicant diference observed
Perception of security does not appear to be correlated with peak time
It might be inferred that security is a constant concern
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC DESCRIPTIVE TRIP-BASED DATA
Mode type
Va!uo SL Tva!
1.118 O.296 8.767 +++
Vans/VWs vehicle type
Peseros vehicle type
The smaller, the safer
Minibuses tend to be safer than peseros
Larger vehicles may represent more likely targets for certain crimes
Communal aspect to minibuses lacking on peseros
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SECURITY BY MODE
Van Peseros
By comparison, 88% of Metrobus BRT passengers felt their physical and moral integrity protected
51.5% due to crowding, 25.5% from insecurity, 14.5% from lack of separation, and 8% from harassment
Evalua DF, 2011.; Investigaciones Sociales Aplicadas S.C., (2009),
The smaller the safer?
~33% Feel secure (4 or 5) on these modes, cumulatively.
Far less secure than formalized DF transport
Compared to the highly formalized bus rapid transit system
in the DF, these collective operations feature security
condence ratings that are less than half that of Metrobus.
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC RFID AWARENESS AND PERCEPTION
72.1% of total surveyed commuters are unaware of RFID chip implementation at Mexipuerto
Commuters generally ambivalent towards RFID chip (more riders aware of it outside than inside)
Dentro / Inside Fuera / Outside
Mexipuerto Mexipuerto
Knowledge and opinion of RFID chip system
Va!uo SL Tva!
1.OO2 O.289 4.2OO +++
O.O92 O.482 O.214
O.246 O.686 O.887
O.62O O.261 2.878 ++
1.188 O.819 8.666 +++
No knowledge of RFID
RFID impact on safety level 1
RFID impact on safety level 2
RFID impact on safety level 3
RFID impact on safety level 4
RFID impact on safety level 5
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC URBAN ENVIRONMENTAL TYPOLOGY
Array of categories
Va!uo SL Tva!
O.861 O.8O8 1.148
O.768 O.297 2.661 +++
O.8O9 O.449 1.8O4 +++
O.848 O.288 2.98O +++
O.898 O.881 2.847 +++
1.267 O.686 2.848 +++
1.26O O.471 2.676 +++
1.869 O.88O 8.678 +++
Broadway auto-oriented
Expressway
Industrial
Neighborhood
Road auto-oriented
Broadway pedestrian-friendly
Commercial shopping
Immediate CETRAM site
Road pedestrian-friendly
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SHORTCOMINGS
Human Error
Bias amongst individuals performing survey (all in certain age group and education level)
Potential misunderstanding of the measurement security
Scheduling
Only one week of surveying
Summer vacation period so schedules for portion of population may have been diferent
Peak and of peak hours did not capture morning rush or late evening
Route Determination
We only operated 4 routes with the same company at both sites
Components specic to the target company of which research was unaware
Two study sites are not perfectly identical and thus comparisons are prone to error
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
CONCLUSIONS
RSA
MXC PART NINE
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC LEVERAGE CETRAMS AS OPPORTUNITY
CETRAM Redevelopment Purposes
E: Increase travel efciency
S: Ensure commuter security
C: Organize on-site commerce
E
+
S
+
C
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC CONCLUSION
E
+
S
+
C
CETRAM as a Component of Safety
Higher improved safety perception at
Mexpuerto when operating inside the
station suggests more intensive
monitoring methods may have stronger
impact on overall system safety than the
solely retail focused redevelopment at El
Rosario.
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC FUTURE RESEARCH
Areas for further study
Trip-based:
Including speed as a component in the model
Including crowding levels as a component in the model
Diferentiating for gender in crowding levels
Model-based:
Developing an ordered probit (due to log likelihood results)
Account for clustered standard errors (multiple surveys in same vehicle)
Site-based:
More in depth morphological identiers
Site-based demographic data
Actual crime data incorporation
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SIGNIFICANCE
Why CETRAMs? Why now?
Pereferico redevelopment:
We are early in the development of these stations
New stations are arriving consistently
Thus, there is a chance for impact
Greater conceptual question:
Can such data accrual actually help in the future development of these
stations?
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
MXC
2.0 CETRAM PEREFERICO
ITDP
MXC
MXC
2.0
FURTHER THOUGHTS
+ POTENTIAL FUTURE RESEARCH
RSA
MXC PART TEN
CONCLUSIONS
MXC
2.0
MXC
2.0 UNDERSTANDING TECHNOLOGYS ROLE
FLOCKTRACKER 2.1
Mobility Futures Collaborative Massachusetts Institute of Technology Urban Launchpad
MXC
2.0
MXC
2.0 ITDP + UTL
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC DEVELOPMENT OF A TOOL
APP DEVELOPMENT
CONCLUSIONS
+ POTENTIAL FUTURE CAPABILITIES
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC DEVELOPMENT OF A TOOL
Development Team:
Daniel Palencia
Danny Chiao
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC
Username
!"#$%"&&'()*#+,-./*
Project Name
01#*2,345+&,3
USER LOGIN
!"#$%&'(
Bus Company
)*+,"-*.'$,-%/ )'(
Vehicle Type
1%2-"# 3$ 4#(,"*# 5'-&#'2/
Route
TRIP CONFIGURATION
12 21 9
STATUS SCREEN STATUS SCREEN
20:11
14.07
Hi user_name!
surveys completed 124
31 rides completed
86.32 total distance (km)
current address
!" $%&'() *+,--+ .!
*/0-,'(&&-1 23 4"56!
answer option two
answer option one
Single choice question. Length
of up to three lines of text is also
allowed with this interface.
SURVEY
answer option three
answer option five
other, custom input
answer option four
FLOCKTRACKER 2.1
Mobility Futures Collaborative Massachusetts Institute of Technology Urban Launchpad
12
survey profile
21 9
STATUS SCREEN
MXC
2.0 EXPANDING ACCESSIBILITY TO TECHNOLOGY
RSA
MXC EXPANDING ACCESSIBILITY TO TECHNOLOGY
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC
MXC
2.0 EXPANDING ACCESSIBILITY TO TECHNOLOGY
Question variability and dynamic survey structuring
Open questions (text and number). Multiple choice questions. Checkbox questions.
Ordered list questions.
Picture questions. Looped questions.
The ability to jump between questions depending on the answer given.
Key improvements and new features
Modern UI design
Improved tracking mechanism
More reliable and robust build
Handling diferent kinds of questions and survey structures
Handling ofine situations
RSA
MXC KEY WEB COMPONENTS
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SURVEY ID
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC SURVEY RESPONSE UPLOADS
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC TRIP LOG UPLOADS
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC TRIP LOG UPLOADS
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC TRIP LOG UPLOADS
MXC
2.0
RSA
MXC TRIP LOG UPLOADS
MXC
2.0
MXC
2.0 GREATER PURPOSE
MXC
2.0
MXC
2.0
SMART Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology
Future Urban Mobility
MIT MISTI Mexico Global Seed Fund
UTL Urban Travel Logistics
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
MXC
2.0
MXC
2.0
SMART Singapore-MIT Alliance for Research and Technology
Future Urban Mobility
MIT MISTI Mexico Global Seed Fund
UTL Urban Travel Logistics
Alejandra Monroy Revilla
Anna Cristina Jimnez Rodrguez
Bardo Fernando Martn Salgado Henrquez
Daniel Alfredo Osorio de la Pea
Edgar Castellanos Contreras
Eric Gmez Cuevas
Ernesto Reyes Lozada
Francisco Lozano Arrieta
Francisco Melndez Jimnez
Gabriela Cadena Hernndez
Giovanni Segura Gmez
Gustavo Emmanuel Hernndez Pea
Isaac Garca Franco
Japhet Santana Huzar
Javier Santiago Reyes
Jos Manuel Landin lvarez
Liz Kirby
Maggie Hellary Franco Pineda
Mara de la Luz Prez Mendoza
Marianely Patln Velzquez
Mercedes Escobar Lpez
Nuria Belem Carranco Toledo
Reynaldo Brito Borrego
Ricardo Gallo Tovar
A Special Thanks to Our Volunteers
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
MXC
2.0
MXC
2.0 QUESTIONS
Thank you.
MXC
2.0
facebook.com/ocktracker
facebook.com/urbanlaunchpadmx
ocktracker.tumblr.com
MXC
2.0 FURTHER READING
Araiza Olivera Toro, H. R. & de la Mora Colunga, L., 2010. "Anlisis urbano del
borde de Chapultepec - CETRAM Chapultepec." Mexico City, Mexico: Facultad
de Arquitectura, Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
BBVA Bancomer. Memorando Informativo. January 2008.
Census Data of INEGI. Censo de poblacin y vivienda 2010. 2010.
Chevigny, P. Edge of the Knife: Police Violence in the Americas. WW Norton. NCJ
Number 160094. 1995.
Cruz Garca, M. J., 2005. "Efectos en el uso del suelo por la instalacin de
estaciones terminales de metro, caso CETRAM Taxquea." Mexico City, Mexico:
Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
Davis, Diane E. Urban Leviathan: Mexico City in the Twentieth Century. Temple
University Press. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 1994.
Davis, Diane E. Zero-Tolerance Policing, Stealth Real Estate Development, and the
Transformation of Public Space: Evidence from Mexico City. Latin American
Perspectives. March 2013. Volume 20, Number 2. Pages 53-76
Gobierno del Distrito Federal. Evaluacin del diseo e instrumentacin de la poltica
de transporte pblico colectivo de pasajeros en el Distrito Federal. February 25, 2011.
Accessed online at http://www.evalua.df.gob.mx/les/recomendaciones/
evaluaciones_nales/ev_transp.pdf
Hanson, S. 2010. Gender and mobility: New approaches for informing sustainability.
Gender, Place and Culture 17, 1: 523
Investigaciones Sociales Aplicadas S.C., (2009), Cuarta Encuesta de Opinin a
usuarias/os del Metrobs sobre equidad de gnero. Reporte de Resultados,
Mxico.
Isunza, G. & Vergara, D., 2012. "Ordenamiento urbano en torno a la operacin
de la Lnea 12 del Metro en la Ciudad de Mxico." Mexico City, Mexico: Centro
de Investigaciones Econmicas Administrativas y Sociales, Instituto Politcnico
Nacional.
Lmbarry Vilchis, F., 2011. "Modelo de planeacin y consenso en los sistemas
de autobuses de trnsito rpido: el csao de Metrobs en la Ciudad de Mxico y
Mexibus en el Estado de Mxico." Mexico City, Mexico Escuela Superior de
Comercio y Administracin, Instituto Politcnico Nacional.
Mantilla, Bernardo Jose Ortiz. Regional Planning and Operations Architectures as
Means to foster Transportation Integration in the Mexico City Metropolitan Area. MIT
Civil Engineering. Master of Science in Transportation Thesis. June 2005.
Melndrez Bayardo, J., 2013. "Desarrollo urbano integrador y permanente para
CETRAM Tasquea." Mexico City, Mexico: Facultad de Arquitectura,
Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
Mitra-Sarkar, S. and Partheeban, P. 2011. Abandon All Hope, Ye Who Enter Here:
Understanding the problem of Eve Teasing in Chennai, India. Transportation
Research Board Conference Proceedings 2: 46, 7484.
Pardo, Carlos (2005). Salida de emergencia: reexiones sociales sobre las polticas
del transporte. Universitas Psicolgicas, Nov-Dec., Vol. 4 No. 3. Pontica Universidad
Javeriana. Bogot, Colombia.
Peters, D. 2001. Gender and transport in less developed countries: A background
paper in preparation for CSD. Gender perspective for Earth Summit 2002: Energy,
transport, information for decision making. London: UNED.
Ramrez, Mara Luisa Flores. Propuesta de un Modelo de Calidad de Servicio para el
Transporte Pblico Metrobs April 2012.
Reyes Slkari, C., n.d. CETRAM Xochimilco. Mexico City, Mexico: Facultad de
Arquitectura, Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico.
Rodrguez Cabrera, A. L., 2013. "Centro de transferencia modal "Picacho"."
Mexico City, Mexico: Facultad de Arquitectura, Universidad Nacional
Autnoma de Mxico.
Shirt, David. A and Rios, Viridiana. Drug Violence in Mexico: Data and Analysis
through 2010. Trans-Border Institute. February 2011.
SCT (2011), Datos de auencia, 2010 February 2011: http://www.metro.df.gob.mx
Tanzarn, N. 2008. Gendered mobilities in developing countries: The case of (urban)
Uganda. Gendered mobilities, edited by T. C. Uteng. Burlington, Vt.: Ashgate.
Shelley, Louise. Corruption and Organized Crime in Mexico in the Post-PRI
Transition. American University. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice. Volume
17. Number 3. Pages 213-231. August 2001.
Vasconcellos, E. 2001. Urban transport, environment, and equity: the case for
developing countries. London: Earthscan
Vasconcellos, E. 2003. Urban transport and tensions in developing countries. In
Global tensions: Challenges and opportunities in the world economy. Edited by L.
Benera and S. Bisnath. New York: Routledge.
Vasquez, Juan Martinez. Analises de los Centros de Transferencia Estrategicas en el
Distrito Federal. Instituto Politecnico Nacoional. Centro de Investigacion e
Innovacion Tecnologica. January 2010.
Vasquez, Juan Martinez. Propuesta de un Modelo de Calidad de Servicio para el
Transporte Pblico Metrobs. January 2010.
Vilchis, Fernando Lmbarry. Modelo de planeacin y consenso en los sistemas de
autobuses de trnsito rpido: el caso de Metrobus en la Ciudad de Mxico y Mexibus
en el Estado de Mxico. Instituto Politecnico Nacional. Mxico DF, October 2011.
MXC
2.0
MXC
2.0 MULTIPLE CHOICE SELECTION
Age (What is your age, from the below categories?)
0-17, 18-24, 25-44, 45-64, 65-plus
Education (What was your furthest level of educational completion?)
Primary, Secondary, Preparatory, Licentiate (undergraduate), Masters and Doctoral
Companions (How many people are you traveling with?)
0, 1-2, 2-3, 4 or more
Origin (Where are you traveling from on this trip? Where did you start?)
List of all zones in the greater Mexico City region, based of of census tract data
Destination (Where are you traveling to in this trip? What is your destination?)
List of all zones in the greater Mexico City region, based of of census tract data
Trip Purpose (Why are you traveling?)
Study, Work, Recreation, Shopping, Other
Mode Security (How secure do you feel this current travel mode is, in regards to personal security?)
1 (Least Important), 2, 3, 4, 5, (Most Important)
Point Security (How secure do you feel at this specic point in time, in these immediate
surroundings?)
1 (Least Important), 2, 3, 4, 5, (Most Important)
Importance of Security (When making travel decisions, how important is personal security?)
1 (Least Important), 2, 3, 4, 5, (Most Important)
Most Secure Mode
Pesero, collective, taxi, light rail, BRT, Trolebus, bus
Least Secure Mode
Pesero, collective, taxi, light rail, BRT, Trolebus, bus
RFID Awareness
Are you aware of the RFID chips present on this vehicle, to monitor its presence in the CETRAM?
If so, how do you rank its impact on the safety of the vehicle? 1 (None), 2, 3, 4, 5, (Greatly Increases)
MXC
2.0