multimodel hub

1. MULTIMODAL TRANSIT HUB AT
ANAND VIHAR, NEW DELHI
ANALYSIS
SUBMITTED BY:
SAMRIDHI
M.ARCH.
SUSAP

2. BUS STAND 1. ENTRY FOR INTER & INTRA BUS
STAND IS SAME.
2. ONE EXIT FOR BOTH TERMINALS
CREATE JAM’S & CONGESTION.
3. NO PROPER PEDESTRIAN MOVEMENT.
CONFLICTS AT VARIOUS POINTS FOR
PEDESTRAINS.
4. NO SEGGREGATION OF INTER &
INTRA TERMINALS.
5. VERY CONGESTED AREA BETWEEN
TWO PLATFORMS.
6. BUSES ARE STANDING AT THEIR
PLACES AND ALSO IN-BETWEEN
AISLES.
7. NO PLACE FOR PEOPLE TO MOVE.8. NO DROP-OFF POINT.
9. NO PROPER SITTING PLACES ON PLATFORM.
10. NO. OF BUSES ARE MORE THAN THE SPACE AVAILABLE.

3. METRO STATION 1. NO SEPEARATE ENTRY FOR METRO STATION.
ENTRY FOR METRO-STATION IS FROM THE
ENTRY FOR BUS TERMINAL.
2. NO PROPER PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIVITY WITH
BUS-TERMINAL.
3. CONNECTIVITY WITH RAILWAY STATION IS
THROUGH FOOT OVER BRIDGE. WHICH HIDDEN
BEHIND THE RAILWAY STATION.
4. LONG QUEUE FOR TICKETING – LESS SPACE.
5. TO REACH ON PLATFORM AFTER BUYING A
TICKET, A LONG PATH HAS TO BE COVERED.
6. FEW SHOPS ARE ON GROUND FLOOR, FIRST
FLOOR IS EMPTY.
7. VERTICAL CORES ARE NOT VISIBLE WHEN
ENTER FROM THE GROUND FLOOR.
8. SERVICES ARE HIDDEN.
9. LIFTS ARE NOT NEAR TO STAIRCASE AND
ESCALATORS.
10. DAY LIGHTING IS LESS.
11. VERY CONGESTED AREA.

4. RAILWAY STATION
1. SEPARATE ENTRY/EXIT.
2. NO DIRECT LINK WITH THE BUS
TERMINAL & METRO STATION.LONG
WALKWAYS.
3. PASSENGERS COMMUTE THROUGH
PUNCTURES IN BOUNDARY WALL –
INFORMAL ACCESS.
4. SPACE IS LESS FOR WAITING &
TICKETING. LONG QUEUES.
5. IN FRONT OF RAILWAY STATION WIDE
ROAD IS FULLOF HAVING CARS, BUSES,
RICKHAWS, AUTO RICKSHAWS.

5. 1. CONGESTIONON ROAD NO. 56 (ONLY
APPROACH ROAD TO RAILWAY STATION) DUE
TO SINGLE ENTRY/EXIT TO COMPLEX,
PEDESTRIAN DISPERSAL, HAWKERS AND
STATION BOUND TRAFFIC.
2. LONGER WALKING DISTANCES FOR
PASSENGERS TO INTERCHANGE / DISPERSAL.
3. PASSENGERS COMMUTE THROUGH
PUNCTURES IN BOUNDARY WALL –INFORMAL
ACCESS.
4. ENCROACHMENT-HAWKERS, GRAMINSEWA,
AUTOS.
5. FOOT OVER BRIDGE TO CROSS ROAD NO. 56
OVERCROWDED.
6. OPEN TO SKY.
7. ESCALATOR FOR ASCENDING ONLY.
8. MANY LEVEL CHANGES FROM ORIGIN TO
DESTINATION.
9. MIXING UP AT VARIOUS LOCATIONS WITH
PEDESTRIANS CAUSING CONFLICT POINTS.
10. USERS COMPLAINED THAT FOOT OVER BRIDGE IS
TOO NARROW OF PEDESTRIANS MOVING ON IT IN
BOTH DIRECTIONS, AND MOST FEEL THAT IT DOES NOT
TAKE THEM NEAR THEIR DESTINATION.

8. INCREASE THE LENGTH
OF FOOT OVER BRIDGE.
PROPOSED
IPT
INCREASE
ROAD WIDTH
PROPOSED
PEDESTRIAN
MOVEMENT