Reinventing Transit

A European Perspective

David Bayliss

Scope of Presentation

• Context

• The Policy Environment

• Urban Form and Planning

• Organisation and Financing

• Systems, Services and Interchange

• Fares, Ticketing and Marketing

• Conclusions

Context – System Provision

MODE USA EUROPE

Motorways/106 325kms 130kms

Roads/106 23,900 9,400

Pass. rail/106 140kms 410kms

Urban rail/106 7kms 18kms

Public buses/106 500 1,360

Context – System Use

MODE USA EUROPE

Automobile 22,500 kms/cap 10,100kms/cap

Bus/Coach 860kms/cap 1,100kms/cap

Heavy rail 80kms/cap 770kms/cap

Urban Rail 80kms/cap 135kms/cap

All 26,700kms/cap 13,200kms/cap

Modal Choice (% public transport + cycling + walking) vs Transport Cost (% GDP)

0,0

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

18,0

20,0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Modal choice (% public transport - cycling - walking)

Tra

ns

po

rt c

os

t (%

GD

P)

Copyright ISTP-UITP

2

Developed cities

USA

Asia

Western Europe

Pub Trans Trends in the EU

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1980 1985 1990 1995 1998

Year

tn P

KM

s

Metro & tramRailBus & coach

Pub Trans Trends in the USA

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

1980 1985 1990 1995 1998

Year

Tn

PK

Ms

RailTransitCoach

Urban Form

• European cities are generally denser

• European cities better established pre auto

• European cities have less road space

• European cities are more centralised

• European inner cities are more vibrant

• European cities more focussed on transit

Density (inhabitants per hectare) vs Modal Choice (% public transport + cycling + walking)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Density (inhabitants per hectare)

Mo

da

l ch

oic

e (

% p

ub

lic

tra

nsp

ort

- c

ycli

ng

-

wa

lkin

g)

Copyright ISTP-UITP

1

20 40 80 160 320

All cities

AsiaUSA

Westen Europe

Policy and Planning

• Auto restrictive polices accepted in EU• Urban containment widely practiced• Auto ownership and use taxes higher in

EU• More priority given to transit• Coordinated transit organisations• Transit planning linked to general

planning

London Parking Standards

AREA MAX PROVISION OF ONE PARKING SPACE PER

CENTRAL 1,000 – 1,500 m2

INNER 600 – 1,000 m2

OUTER 300 – 600 m2

Modal Choice for Mechanized Trips (% public transport trips) vs Parking Places per 1000 Jobs in the CBD

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Modal choice for mechanized trips (% public transport trips)

Par

kin

g p

lace

s p

er

1000

job

s in

th

e C

BD

Copyright ISTP-UITP

5

Developed cities

USA

Asia

Western Europa

Fuel Prices – USA and EU

0

40

80

120

cents/litre

USCanadaGermanyFranceHollandUKUntaxed

Car Ownership

100150200250300350400450500550600

cars/000

USCanadaGermanyFranceHollandUKEU Denmark

• Higher in the US• Mass ownership

earlier• 350/cap in 1960 (US)• 250/cap in Canada• 100/cap in EU

Modal Choice for Mechanized Trips (% public transport trips) vs Motorization Rate (number of vehicles per 1000 Inhabitants)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Modal choice mechanized trips (% public transport trips)

Mo

tori

zati

on

rat

e (

nu

mb

er

of

veh

icle

s p

er

1000

in

hab

itan

ts)

Copyright ISTP-UITP

4

Developed cities

Manchester

MunichLyon

Asia

USA

Western Europe

Effects of Pedestrianisation

0 10 20 30 40 50

Rouen

Minneapolis

Pomona

Atchison

Essen

Dusseldorf

Munich

Increase in Trade %

Organisation & Financing

• Tradition of public funding in Europe

• Higher cost recovery ratios

• Systematic approach to development

• Some hypothecation (e.g. VT in Paris)

• Growing separation of planning and ops.

• Development of innovative financing

Bus Liberalisation in GBChanges 1985/86 – 1999/00

LONDON OTHER METS

Costs -39% -45%

Services +31% +19%

Ridership +13% -42%

Subsidy -80% -66%

Private Funding – Croydon Trams

• Planned by LT• LT secured powers• Worked up with

private partners• Subject to competitive

bid• Design, build, finance

& operate concession

• Capital £280m• Public share £200m• Pri. Share £80m• Concessionaire

operates without revenue grant or guarantees

Service ProvisionAnnual vehicle-hours/capita

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Service provision

0.5m 1.0m 1.5m 2.0m 2.5m

City Size

EuropeUSA

Modal Choice for Mechanized Trips (% public transport trips) vs Annual Seats x km per hectare (in thousands)

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0 700.0

Annual seats x km per hectare (in thousands)

Me

chan

ized

tri

ps

(% p

ub

lic tr

ansp

ort

trip

s)

Copyright ISTP-UITP

Services - Buses

• EU services expanded by 15% since 1980

• Modern accessible vehicles now common

• Extensive priorities on congested roads

• Bus stop quality and protection

• Real time passenger information systems

• Convenient ticketing

• Higher operating speeds than US buses

Bus Priorities

• Bus Lanes

• Priority turns and bus gates

• BUSCOOT

• Signal pre-emption

• Bus boarders

• Transit malls

• Exclusive busways (guided & unguided)

Bus lanes in Geneva

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1977 1981 1985 1989

Year

Bus lane kmsPass ml.

Bus Quality Corridors

• High quality vehicles/well trained staff

• Frequent service/network ticketing

• Extensive traffic priorities

• Enforcement of traffic regulations

• Good quality stops/shelters/local lighting

• Real time passenger information

• Ridership up between 10% and 40%

Modal Choice for Mechanized Trips (% public transport trips) vs Road Network Speed/Public Transport Speed

0,00

0,50

1,00

1,50

2,00

2,50

3,00

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Modal choice for motorized trips (% public transport trips)

Ro

ad n

etw

ork

sp

ee

d /

Pu

blic

tra

ns

po

rt s

pe

ed

Copyright ISTP-UITP

6

Developed cities

USA

Asia

Western Europe

Services – Light Rail

• Renaissance since mid 1980s

• 16 new systems built

• 6 more being built

• Modern accessible vehicles

• Usually built as core of integrated system

• Supported by park and ride

• Generally well used (DLR – 35m p.a.)

Services – Urban Rail

• Europe well provided with metros

• EU 26, USA 14 & Canada 3 systems

• EU urban rail use 2x USA + Canada

• EU has extensive commuter operations

• EU urban rail systems are well integrated

• Development and rail systems well related

Rail Links to Airports

REGION EXISTING PLANNED

Europe 40 49

N America 14 32

Asia 7 22

Africa 1 6

Total 62 116

Improved Interchange

Interchange is a necessary evil

• No fare penalty or rebooking

• Sheltered & secure accommodation

• Real time passenger information

• Minimise walk distances & level changes

• Minimize delays by careful scheduling

• Add value where possible

Fares and Ticketing

Required Features:

• Pre-payment

• Multi-modal

• Comprehensible

• Easy to use

• Reward loyalty

• Provide management information

Travelcards in London

• Increased ridership by a quarter

• Increased receipts by 10%

• Reduced fraud by over a half

• Saved ticketing costs & reduced queuing

• Reduced car use by 1% overall

• Total benefits of £500m p.a.

• Underpinned service improvements

Smarter Marketing

Traditional marketing addresses existing markets

Individualised marketing can develop new• Focuses on journeys that could use

transit• Contacts individuals• Provides information• Provides incentives

Conclusions

• Europe has several characteristics which favour transit

• General planning and public policies are sympathetic to transit

• Unrealistic to expect transit usage in the US to match that in Europe

• But there are some European practices that are worth considering

Conclusions - 2

Interesting innovations in Europe:

• Auto use and management policies

• Service procurement

• Innovative financing of transit projects

• Transit priorities

• Bus quality corridors

Conclusions - 3

Interesting innovations in Europe:

• Individualised marketing

• Exploitation of new market opportunities

• Light rail development

• Creation of quality interchange places

• Fares and ticketing initiatives

The End

Thank you for your attention