COLLECTION AND COMPILATION OF 10 SUTI INDEX IN HO CHI MINH .... SUTI in Ho Chi Minh_Viet Nam.pdf ·...

C O L L E C T I O N A N D C O M P I L A T I O N O F 1 0 S U T I I N D E X I N H O C H I M I N H C I T Y

By MBA. Phạm Minh HaiTransport Development & Strategy Institute - TDSIMinistry of Transport of Viet Nam

Dhaka, Banglades, September 2018

Existing Conditions of the Urban Transport in Ho Chi Minh City

Ho Chi Minh City•Land area 2,095.6 sq.km.•Population : 8.61 mil.•Average polulation density:4,029 people/sq.km.

204/10/2018

Growth rate in period 2005-2017: 3,16%/year Number of people live regularly in the city: about 13 million

people.

Put great pressure on infrastructure in general, particularly transport infrastructure

HO CHI MINH CITY IS A SUPER CITY HO CHI MINH CITY IS A SUPER CITY

3


Explosive personal motorized vehicles!

Number of vehicles:

Type of vehicles Statistic

Motorbikes 7.44 mil.

Cars 285 thous.

Buses 2,603 pcs

Growth rate(2011-2017):

Some indicators:

Motorbikes 6.77%/year

Cars 11.77%/year

Indicators Statistic Actual

Motorbikes/1000 people

906 motorbikes 623 motorbikes

Cars/1000 people 33 cars 27 cars

ROAD TRANSPORT VEHICLESROAD TRANSPORT VEHICLES

Source: DOT, HCMC Police, Vietnam Register Authority, 2018


Whole City Roads length: 4,202.65km Road surface area: 41.34 km2 Land area for transport: 80.41km2 (8.8% of urban construction land)

Transport infrastructure is slow to develop!Transport infrastructure has been overloaded!

Growth in period 2011-2017Occupy road of vehicle when participating traffic (*)

(*) Calculated by 60% of traffic flow at the same time

Length

Road surface area

Land for transport

Motorbikes

Cars

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12%

1,47%

4,8%

6%

6,77%

11,77%

23.19

31.28

41.34

17.59

32.41

49.56

2005 2011 2017

Diện tích mặt đường (km2)Diện tích chiếm dụng của PTGT (km2)

-19,9%

- 3.6%

24.4%

ROAD TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTUREROAD TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

Road surface area (km2)

Occupation area of vehicle (km2)


6

144 public bus routes - 105 subsidized routes;

- 39 non-subsidized routes.

Pick-up students in 123 schools/universities in 14

districts 01 waterbus (BachDang - Linh Dong):10,8km (opened inNovember 25, 2017).

The bus network is old, based on the existing routenetwork, forms the axial and branch lines distributedunder fan shape form with the wings are centripetaland radial axes coming from 02 main centres of BenThanh and Cho Lon.Of the 105 subsidized bus routes: 42 centripetalroutes (40%), 21 radial routes (20%) and 42 directconnections to districts (40%). High density is foundat Ben Thanh and Cho Lon due to the lack of transitpoints.


PUBLIC PASSENGER TRANSPORT STATUSPUBLIC PASSENGER TRANSPORT STATUSNetwork

Bus Map Network

704/10/2018

Collection and Compilation of 10 SUTI Indicators in Ho Chi Minh City

8

Volume of Publicpassenger transport

Total volume of publictransport in 2017 was604.1 million pax(including bus andtaxi), satisfied 9.38%of travel demand;

Transport volume bybus was 303.6 milliontimes, account for4.72% of traveldemand.

0.0

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

700.0

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

57.389.2

163.3

254.6

308.9

380.3

452.1481.1

544.1 555.8599.6

622.1594.5 574.7567.7

604.1

36.273.5

122.1

208.7253.4

296.2342.5342.1

364.8358.1

413.1414.3

356.2323.7

298.2306.6

VTHKCC Buýt phổ thông có trợ giá

Transport quantity by bus dropped in years (2013-2016) and has signsof recovery in 2017.


PUBLIC PASSENGER TRANSPORT STATUSPUBLIC PASSENGER TRANSPORT STATUS

Public transport has difficulties on conditions and environment fordevelopmet

Public transport (consists of bus and waterbus) meetsabout 5% travel demand of the whole city (about 8% ofurban traffic demand). Volume is continuously declined(7,02%/year in period 2012-2017).

Route distribution network is not proper, lack the links to newdevelopment towns

No stops in large alley

Infrastructure is nor enough and weak, unsuitable transitpoints

The quality of vehicles and infrastructure has been invested,but no priority in traffic (private lanes, etc.) so not attractpeople..

Big public transport projects such as metro, BRT are slowdue to lack of money.

PUBLIC PASSENGER TRANSPORT STATUSPUBLIC PASSENGER TRANSPORT STATUS


Number of traffic accidents 2017: 36 accidents 2016: 37 accidents 2015: 25 accidents

Cat Lai port area

Airport area

Center

Traffic congestion areas Center. Airport. Cat Lai port. City’s gates

Traffic congestion level In rush hours. In any time of the day

(usually in the center).

Traffic congestion has been more and more complicated

TRAFFIC CONGESTION SITUATIONTRAFFIC CONGESTION SITUATION


• The City’s goals to the development of public transport: taking 20-25% and 35-45% of traffic demands by the year of 2020 and 2030, respectively

• The Ring Roads 1, 2, 3 withtotal length of 351 km;

• 5 elevated lines with total length of 70.7km;

• 11 urban railway lines (8 metro lines 172,6km, 3 tramway or monorails 56,5km) , and 06 BRT 95,2km.

• 5 expressway starting from HCMC with total of 313km long.


URBAN TRANSPORT PLANNINGURBAN TRANSPORT PLANNING

Tan Son Nhat International Airport

Hoa Hung Station (National Railway)


SOME IMAGES ON CITY’S TRANSPORT STATUSSOME IMAGES ON CITY’S TRANSPORT STATUS

Phu My Bridge, District 7

Binh Loi Bridge, Binh Thanh district


SOME IMAGES ON CITY’S TRANSPORT STATUSSOME IMAGES ON CITY’S TRANSPORT STATUS

Pilot application of the SUTI in Ho Chi MinhSupporting ESCAP to plan a field visit, advisory and consultation meeting in Ho Chi Minh

Site visit to urban transport system

Ben Thanh station and bus

Water bus

MRT Line No. 1 (under construction)

04/10/2018

1. Extent to which transport plans cover public transport, intermodal facilities and infrastructure for active modes

2. Modal share of active and public transport in commuting

3. Convenient access to public transport service

4. Public transport quality and reliability

5. Traffic fatalities per 100.000 inhabitants

6. Affordability – travel costs as part of income

7. Operational costs of the public transport system

8. Investment in public transportation systems

9. Air quality (pm2.5 concentration)

10. Greenhouse gas emissions

Provide collected and compiled data for 10 indicators

1504/10/2018


Aspects Explanation Score

I) walking networks

- Ho Chi Minh city has no clear vision and goals in the development of walking facilities - The City includes spatial planning for pedestrians by making plans on organization of walking streets and improvement of walking facilities- The City has no specific funding plan

1

II) cycling networks

- Ho Chi Minh city has no clear vision and goals in the development of cycling facilities and public cycling system. - The City has also built the pilot plan on providing free public bicycle station in the downtown area but no plan for the implementation in the City-wide scale yet.- The City has no specific funding plan

1

III) intermodal transfer facilities

-- The City plan mentions on the development of parking and station facilities and logistics centers with specific development phases. - The City has no clear financial resource in the funding plan

2

IV) public transport

- The City’s goals to the development of public transport: taking 20-25% and 35-45% of traffic demands by the year of 2020 and 2030, respectively. - Towards such goals, it is planned to develop 11 urban railway lines, and 06 BRT by the year of 2030 with specific routing.- The City already set forth funding plans for the public transport development to submit to the Prime Minister for approval.

3

Total (sum) 7

Indicator 1. Extent to which transport plans cover public transport, intermodal facilities and infrastructure for active modes

Aspects Score YEAR COMMENTS

Sum score value to enter in data sheet for Indicator 1

7 2016

Score is based on ‘Prime Minister’s Decision No. 568/QD-TTg: Approval for transportation development planning of Ho Chi Minh city by 2020 with a vision after 2020. 2013

16


Indicator 2. Modal share of active and public transport in commuting

Data on the modal share of transport is collected from Department of Transport’s reports & the JICA’s survey on railway in Vietnam towns in 2015.

Indicator VALUE YEAR COMMENTSModal share of active and

public transport trips in commuting (%)

28.52 2017Data is based on an update of travel surveys, HCM DOT reports, 2017

PURPOSE TRIPS per year (million)MODE # subtotalsa. Scheduled bus and minibus 306.60b. Train, metro, tram 0c. Ferry 0d. Other public (water bus) 0.36e. Public transport (a+b+c+d) 306.96f. Walking 1,390.4g. Bicycle 136.26h. Active transport (f+g) 1,526.66i. Individual motorized vehicles (Taxi, passenger car,motorcycle and others i.e. trucks, etc.) 4,594.76 4,594.76

j. Total (e+h+i) 6,428.38k. Public and active (e+h) 1,833.62l. Modal share of active and public transport (%) 28.52

1704/10/2018


Indicator 3. Convenient access to public transport service

1. Some collected parametersTotal number of bus routes : 144 (including 105 subsidizedbus routes and 30 non-subsidized bus routes)Total network length: over 3,500kmNumber of bus stops and shelters: 4,405

Compilation method:1. Caculate the coverage area within 500 meterradius around each stop/station by eachdistrict/suburb district (in sq. kilometer);2. Multiple the result with the district populationdensity to make the number of population accessingto public transport service within 500 meter radius.The sum of results of each district presents thenumber of City population within 500 meter radiusaround public transport stops/stations.3. Divide the obtained Result in Step 2 to the numberof City population to get the Indicator 3 result

1804/10/2018

Number of bus stops/shelters

Coverage area within 500m radius (sq.km)

Pop. Density (inhabitant/km2) Inhabitants

2,063 1,619.5 4,029 6,524,784Total Population 8,611,110% within 500m buffers 75,8%


Indicator 4. Public transport quality and reliability

Indicator VALUE YEAR COMMENTS

Public transport quality and reliability

41.77 2017Based on the Research “Survey of people satisfaction indicator on public services in 2017”

1904/10/2018

Dissatisfied Neither Satisfied

RESPAV

SCORE SATISFVery Partly Nor Partly Very

Dimension 1 2 3 4 5Driver’s attitude 2 41 178 166 13 400 3.37 44.75Bus conductor’s attitude 1 35 188 162 14 400 3.38 44.00On-bus facilities (air conditioner, seats,…)

3 25 182 174 16400 3.44 47.50

Bus route 1 16 214 155 14 400 3.41 42.25Running time (open/close of line) 2 24 198 162 14 400 3.41 44.00Ticket price 1 4 166 202 27 400 3.63 57.25Safety, security 3 58 176 141 22 400 3.30 40.75Hygiene on bus 3 37 212 135 13 400 3.30 37.00Hygiene at bus station 6 45 216 122 11 400 3.22 33.25Operation information of bus 1 20 220 148 11 400 3.37 39.75Station distance 2 22 220 145 11 400 3.35 39.00Feedback of questions 2 7 246 135 10 400 3.36 36.25General evaluation 11 30 210 148 1 400 3.25 37.25Responses 38 364 2626 1995 177 5200 400.00 41.77


Indicator 5. Traffic fatalities per 100.000 inhabitants


Traffic fatalities per 100.000 inhabitants 8 2017 Based on DOT reports, 2017

2004/10/2018

Fatalities #Road transport 714Railway transport 0Tram 0Ferryboats 0Other 3Total 717Inhabitants 8.611.100Fatalities/100,000 inh 8


Indicator 6. Affordability – travel costs as part of income

2104/10/2018

No. Services Market shares (%)

Monthly cost(VND)

Weighted monthly cost (VND)

1 Sai Gon Star Co.Ltd 2.1% 242,000 5,1782 City Transport Co.Ltd 5.0% 242,000 12,2013 Sai Gon Bus JSC 15.3% 242,000 37,0344 Cooperative No. 15 3.4% 242,000 8,3285 Cooperative No. 19/5 24.1% 242,000 58,2756 Cooperative No. 26 3.6% 242,000 8,7467 Cooperative No. 28 5.1% 242,000 12,2598 Dong Nam Cooperative 6.0% 242,000 14,6249 Quyet Thang Cooperative 9.8% 242,000 23,763

10 Quyet Tien Cooperative 3.3% 242,000 7,94111 Thanh Son Cooperative 1.0% 242,000 2,36212 Viet Thang Cooperative 9.9% 242,000 24,04413 City Transport Cooperative Union 11.3% 242,000 27,246

Total 100% 242,000Average Income 2017 (VND) 5,481,000Affordability – travel costs as part of income (%) 4,42


Indicator 7. Operational costs of the public transport system


Operational costs of the public transport system 46 2017

The data is from the 13 companies offering public bus services in the city

2204/10/2018

No. Services Market shares (%) Revenues Transport Operating

Expenses Fare box ratio

1 Sai Gon Star Co.Ltd 2.1% 23,381,690,970 55,862,815,578 41.9%2 City Transport Co.Ltd 5.0% 55,343,023,179 139,656,081,004 39.6%3 Sai Gon Bus JSC 15.3% 168,411,089,421 420,526,422,133 40.0%4 Cooperative No. 15 3.4% 32,746,551,852 64,258,097,793 51.0%5 Cooperative No. 19/5 24.1% 269,710,318,150 567,199,545,646 47.6%6 Cooperative No. 26 3.6% 45,306,186,303 103,054,014,530 44.0%7 Cooperative No. 28 5.1% 58,283,280,542 112,483,143,107 51.8%8 Dong Nam Cooperative 6.0% 66,579,976,778 143,291,001,739 46.5%9 Quyet Thang Cooperative 9.8% 87,726,489,701 213,095,005,435 41.2%

10 Quyet Tien Cooperative 3.3% 41,710,043,227 80,238,050,262 52.0%11 Thanh Son Cooperative 1.0% 11,019,399,383 32,055,140,488 34.4%12 Viet Thang Cooperative 9.9% 116,906,608,405 226,764,395,351 51.6%13 City Transport Cooperative Union 11.3% 116,964,136,806 224,977,640,406 52.0%

Total 100% 1,094,088,794,717 2,383,461,353,472 46%


Indicator 8. Investment in public transportation systems


Investment in public transportation systems 13.3 2017

Based on average transport investments by the city for the five years 2013-2017

2304/10/2018

Investment in Units 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 AveragePublic Transport Facilities

1000 VND 1,238,985 1,252,080 1,012,000 1,163,002 1,044,030 1,142,019.33

The whole Transport

1000 VND 14,989,277 6,650,341 6,094,651 6,452,818 8,706,486 8,578,714.39

Share % 13.3


Indicator 9. Air quality (PM10 or PM2.5)

Basis for proposing min-max values for PM2.5:- According to the Vietnam Standard: QCVN 05:2013/BTNMT, the annual mean level of PM2.5 is 25micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3).- According to the World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation, it is at safety level if PM2.5 is under10.According to the report, in 2017, Ho Chi Minh City has 87 days of average air quality index, 14 days of exceeding national standards, 222 days of exceeding WHO air quality guidelines. Air pollution in Ho Chi Minh City isoriginated from the air masses along the coast, means of transportation, accumulation of pollution, etc.The monitoring results in 2017 showed that the yearly average concentrations of fine particulate matter (PM 2.5) in Ho Chi Minh city is 29.6 µg/m3 (national standard is 25 µg/m3).

2404/10/2018


Station LocationPM 2.5

Populationin area

Populationpercentageyearly

mean29,96 8,611,100 100

Total population in the central area 8,611,100 100Population weighted concentration 29.96

Indicator 10. Greenhouse gas emissionsCO2 Emission amount (kg CO2) = Travel distance (km) * Fuel consumption (liter/km)

* Rate of CO2 emission from fuel (kg CO2/liter)

No. Vehicles QuantityDaily Average

Travel Distance(km/day)

FuelsFuel

consumption(litre/km)

CO2 Emissionof fuel

(kgCO2/litre)

Daily CO2 Emission

(calculation)

Adjusted Factor

Emissions kgCO2 per

day

Emissions tonsCO2 per

year

1 4-stroke engine motorbike <125cc 5,952,000 10 Petrol 0.0459 2.297 6,275,330 0.8 5,020,264 1,832,397

2 Scooter 1,488,000 10 Petrol 0.0803 2.297 2,744,603 0.8 2,195,682 801,4243 Bus 2,603 80 Diesel 0.0075 2.712 4,236 0.9 3,812 1,3914 4–seat car 228,490 14 Petrol 0.1838 2.297 1,350,522 0.8 1,080,418 394,3525 7-seat car 57,122 14 Petrol 0.2986 2.297 548,507 0.8 438,806 160,1646 Truck 165,382 60 Diesel 0.0075 2.712 201,832 0.8 161,466 58,935

TOTAL 5,708,452 2,500,459POPULATION 8,297,500

Emission/capital 0.38Indicator VALUE YEAR COMMENTS

Greenhouse gas emissions 0.38 2017

Based on estimate of traffic volumes (car, bus,motorbikes) on city road network for 2017, and average national emission factors per traffic mode


2504/10/2018

The CO2 emission of fuel (kg CO2/liter) = Proportion *static calorific value* norminal CO2 emission rate/ 1000

Compilation Results of 10 SUTI Indicators in Ho Chi Minh

# Indicators Units WeightsRange

MIN MAX

1Extent to which transport plans cover public transport, intermodal facilities and infrastructure for active modes

0 - 16 scale 0.1 0 16

2 Modal share of active and public transport in commuting % of trips 0.1 10 90

3 Convenient access to public transport service

% of population 0.1 20 100

4 Public transport quality and reliability % satisfied 0.1 30 95

5 Traffic fatalities per 100.000 inhabitants # fatalities 0.1 35 0

6 Affordability – travel costs as share of income

% of income 0.1 35 3.5

7 Operational costs of the public transport system

Cost recovery

ratio0.1 22 175

8 Investment in public transportation systems

% of total investment 0.1 0 50

9 Air quality (pm2.5) μg/m3 0.1 75 10

10 Greenhouse gas emissions from transport Tons/cap 0.1 2.75 0

Year: 2017Ho Chi Minh

7

28,52

75.77

41.77

8

5.71

46,3

13.3

29.96

0.38

NORMALIZATION

43,75

23,15

69,71

18,11

76,21

92,98

15,89

27

69,29

86,2804/10/2018


Index 43.25

0.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.0060.0070.0080.0090.00

100.00

Extent to whichtransport plans cover

public transport,intermodal facilitiesand infrastructure…

Modal share of activeand public transport in

commuting

Convenient access topublic transport

service

Public transport qualityand reliability

Traffic fatalities per100.000 inhabitants

Affordability – travel costs as part of

income

Operational costs ofthe public transport

system

Investment in publictransportation systems

Air quality (pm2.5)

Greenhouse gasemissions from

transport

Compilation Results of 10 SUTI Indicators in Ho Chi Minh

Ho Chi MInh City Normalized performance

2704/10/2018


Proposals - Recommendations

1. It is proposed to study min-max values for each Indicator by city groups of eachcontinent (i.e. Asia, Europe, America…); by development levels (i.e. developingcountries, developed countries…); or by city scales (i.e. population, land area…)

2. It is proposed to further study and supplement equal index to be used as areplacement, for example, PM10 can be replaced by PM2.5; Greenhouse gasemissions can be replaced by some index characterized for emissions from transportvehicles, such as CO, NOx, SO2 and available data (which is often statistical inreports on EIA caused by transport activities)…

3. In regard to the weight calculation method, the SUTI Data Collection Guidancesuggests “equal weight” method, which is not reasonable and tight enough sincethe importance is different among indicators. Therefore, it is recommendable thatcities would calculate the “Weight” by using some methods, such as, specialist, AHPand so on, so that it can be appropriate with their conditions.

2804/10/2018


Thank you for your attention

COLLECTION AND COMPILATION OF 10 SUTI INDEX IN HO CHI MINH .... SUTI in Ho Chi Minh_Viet Nam.pdf ·...

Documents

Transcript of COLLECTION AND COMPILATION OF 10 SUTI INDEX IN HO CHI MINH .... SUTI in Ho Chi Minh_Viet Nam.pdf ·...