ShanghaiSmartCities2014 141016

Lam, Huang, Di Bona Smart Transport for Smart Cities 2014 Smart City China Expo & Conference, Shanghai, China, 16-18 October, 2014 1

Wilkie Lam BSc, MSc, CEng, MICE, MHKIE, CMILT Managing Director, LLA Consultancy Ltd, [email protected]

Dr. Thomas Huang BSc, MSc General Manager, LLA (Shanghai) Consultancy Ltd,

[email protected]

Richard Di Bona BA(Hons), MSc, MBA, CMILT, MCIHT Director, LLA Consultancy Ltd, [email protected]

2014 Smart City Expo & Congress

Shanghai, China, 16-18 October 2014

Smart Transport for

Smart Cities


Introduction

Hong Kong practice established in 1996 China practice (里里通) established in 2002 Over 1000 transport-related projects for various clients including the SAR Government, quasi-government organisations, major property developers, contractors, etc. ISO 9001:2008 certified.


20 Years’ International Experience

Our Projects


Partners

Clients

Real Estate

Architect


Latest Technologies and Trends


New Highlights of Smart Transport

Electronic Car Plate Electronic Road Pricing System

Smart Reversible Lanes Smart Crosswalk Smart GPS

Warning System of Traffic Safety


Smart Parking System Searching, Booking

Smart GPS

Identifying , Entering

Parking

Remote Payment

Smart GPS

Before Parking

Parking

Leaving

Indoor Positioning System

Indoor Positioning System


Micro Simulation

Plan Testing

Before Construction During Construction

Pedestrian Simulation of Retail

Retail Distribution Pedestrian Distribution


Problems with Current

Transport Planning

Approaches


Challenges: The Motor Car From 1960-2002: real income growth 2.0% p.a.

cars per capita growth 4.6% p.a. (Dargay, J., Gately, D. & Sommer, M. Vehicle Ownership and Income Growth, Worldwide: 1960-2030, Energy Journal, 2007, Vol. 28, No. 4)

• Compound growth: 130% income; 560% cars per capita

• Then add to this population growth

Despite massive investments in public transport • CapEx & OpEx


A Need to Critique Standard Practice

Standard practice has NOT solved traffic congestion

Let alone delivered “smart solutions for smart cities”

New thinking and new approaches are necessary


Functional Road Hierarchy

Trunk Routes:

Higher speed & capacity

For longer distances

Higher Speeds

Distributors:

Between trunk & local roads

Local Roads:

Low speeds

In/around neighbourhoods


Traditional Public Transport Hierarchy

Heavy Rail:

Commuter Rail

Metro

Intermediate:

LRT or Monorail

Bus Rapid Transit

Local:

Bus

Minibus


Issues with Public Transport Hierarchy

For driving, a Functional Road Hierarchy makes sense:

It is quite easy to drive from one road to another (congestion permitting) – no need to change vehicle

But on Public Transport, passengers must physically interchange between services:

Time consuming

Inconvenient

Adds uncertainty to journey time

Passengers may not have a seat on the next leg

There may be substantial distances to walk/ roads to cross


Issues with Interchange


Why Buses Can Be Good (or Not) With good bus networks, travellers sometimes prefer bus:

• Point-to-point journeys possible; no need to interchange

However, buses get caught up in congestion

• So journey times less reliable


Is Bus Priority (or BRT) the Answer?

Takes capacity away from other road users

Can intensify congestion and emissions

So might lead to more scarce land being used to reinstate road capacity

But the costs of

this seldom

considered


How Do Cities Plan Public Transport?

Due to the scale of investment and works required for mass transit, a strategic view is usually taken • This approach is infrastructure-focussed

• Aligns with how infrastructure engineers think

But for the passenger/ customer, the experience can be quite different • Many hassles faced by passengers are overlooked in the

strategic planning of infrastructure


Origin

Destination

Public Transport Trip: Strategic View


Origin

Destination

Journey Broken Down into Stages

Which is the weakest link?

Uncertainty at every stage.

Compound uncertainty worse.

Do not overlook any stage!


Walking is Not Always Easy! What about: The elderly? Disabled? With young

children? Heavy

shopping bags?

In bad weather?


Waiting Uncertainty: increases with interchange

Comfort, safety, security of facilities – and bad weather?


Onboard: Comfort, Crowding, etc

Crowding

Comfort: getting a seat? Temperature

Security

news.bbc.co.uk

www.straitstimes.com news.com.au


Feeders – Journey Time Reliability www.unblockcambridge.com

author’s photo author’s photo

author’s photo


A New Way Forward:

Personal Rapid Transit


What is Personal Rapid Transit (PRT)?

Automated guideway transit system

Vehicles for an individual or small group (family or friends) travelling together

On a segregated network

Trips are non-stop without transfers

All stations are on bypasses

• No interference with mainline traffic


What does Personal Rapid Transit Offer?

No travelling with strangers: Sense of security

Stations can be spaced far more closely than metro

Point-to-point journeys: • No transfers between lines needed

• Mass customisation

Likely quicker journeys for passengers: • No intermediate stopping

• Service available on demand, minimal wait


Smart Transport for Smart Cities

What would the key features be for

“Smart Transport for Smart Cities”?

Three perspectives:

The passenger perspective: the customer

The operator (developer) perspective

The city’s perspective: government, social, environmental


Smart City Transport: Passenger Perspectives

Accessible, especially for those with children, luggage, the mobility impaired, etc; with minimal road crossings

Provide reliable information on journey times

Comfortable, convenient, safe, secure, affordable

Like car without the hassle of parking or congestion

Like taxi without the hassle of finding one

Public transport without crowding, strangers, interchange or inconvenient service schedules

Personalised: “mass customisation”


Smart City Transport: Operator Perspective

Reliable and robust systems: good automation

Easy to manage:

• Reduced reliance of factors beyond immediate control

(e.g. issue metro operators face with bus feeders)

Affordable and quick to build

Cheap to operate

Offers adequate capacity and flexibility to add or alter routes (a current advantage of bus over rail)

Ideally, profitable to implement and operate


Smart City Transport: City Perspective

Affordable for cities:

• Minimise CapEx requirements

• Reduce or eliminate OpEx subsidies (ideally profitable?)

Easy to implement

• Modest space-take; minimal take of ground level space

• Able to fit/ retrofit into small areas

• Quick to implement

System attractive to users:

• Makes investment worthwhile

• Can have a real impact on traffic congestion

And so can help “green” the city


LLA’s Experience with Personal Rapid Transit

LLA has been following Personal Rapid Transit (PRT) for more than 10 years

We have reviewed a number of systems • Some are better than others

A critical difference is between heavy, supported PRT’s and lightweight suspended PRT’s

Heavy, Supported PRT Lightweight, Suspended PRT


Issues with Heavy Supported PRT Systems

Maximum gradient (of best-in-class) = 10%. So either:

• Wholly elevated: expensive; accessibility issues for stations;

• At street-level: substantial land-take and interference with pedestrians and street traffic; or,

• Elevated track with very long ramps for street-level stations

Systems become more expensive and visually intrusive

Harder to fit/ retrofit into urban environments

Fewer stations possible per km of track


The Need for a Light, Suspended PRT Solution

LLA prefers lightweight, suspended PRT: Maximum ramp gradient = 45 degrees. Turning radius = 3m Main track 5-15m above ground, with street-level stops: • Minimises ground level space-take • Allows good accessibility for mobility impaired • Does not interfere with road traffic or pedestrians • Can easily be fitted/ retrofitted into urban spaces

Modular track design enables rapid construction Can have stations 200m apart; and on either side of road


Capacity for five people, or two with bicycles, those with shopping bags, pushchairs, wheelchairs (level boarding)

Cornering: swivel suspension means that no super-elevation (cost) of track is required. Journeys are comfortable

Offers real-time journey information

Reliable journey times

Aboard the PRT


Due to cost of traditional LRT, monorail, metro systems, often there are relatively few lines

But a grid of lightweight, suspended PRT tracks is possible:

• Spreads demand across the network

• Increased boarding/ alighting capacity per unit area

• Decreases walk-in distances

• 500m grid results in most destinations under 200m from a stop

• More point-to-point journeys: improved market penetration

Property development benefits would be more widespread, covering larger areas of a city than possible with metro stations 1-2km apart

Developing an Urban Grid


Metro: Stations Spaced at 2000m

Within 50m

Within 200m

Within 300m

Within 500m 2km x 2km area:


Metro: Stations Spaced at 1000m

Within 50m

Within 200m

Within 300m



One Line of PRT

Within 50m

Within 200m

Within 300m



PRT with 1000-metre grid

Within 50m

Within 200m

Within 300m



PRT with 500-metre grid

Within 50m

Within 200m

Within 300m



Comparison of Area Coverage % of Area within

Station Catchment Area

Metro Spaced at

2000m

Metro Spaced at

1000m

PRT: One Line

PRT: 1000m

Grid

PRT: 500m Grid

Within 50m 0.3% 0.5% 2% 6% 10%

Within 200m 4% 7% 19% 61% 96%

Within 300m 9% 16% 31% 82% 100%

Within 500m 25% 44% 54% 100% 100%

Beyond 500m 75% 56% 46% 0% 0%

Track km (Two-way) 2km 2km 2km 8km 16km

Likely Capital Cost ¥2,000m ¥2,000m <¥100m <¥400m <¥750m

Grids of PRT offer Smart Cities an effective, efficient and Smart transport system


Take Advantage of the Cost Difference

Capital Costs (RMBm/km)

Capacity (passengers/ hour/direction)

Capacity per RMBm

System Range Say (A) Range Say (B) (B) ÷ (A)

Heavy Metro ¥320-1600m ¥960m 30-90,000 60,000 63

Light Metro ¥240-560m ¥400m 10-40,000 25,000 63

LRT ¥80-560m ¥320m 5-40,000 23,000 72

Tram ¥40-200m ¥120m 2.5-20,000 11,000 92

Monorail ¥210-610m ¥410m 1-15,000 8,000 20

PRT ¥30–60m ¥45m 8,250 8,250 183

Note: Cheaper LRTs &Trams are street-level systems (interfering with traffic)

PRT has a tremendous capital cost advantage over alternatives

Offers tremendous cost effectiveness, relative to alternatives


Any queries, please contact us

Booth 3D69

LLA HK 里里通（上海）

[email protected] [email protected]

[email protected] [email protected]

Our Website :

www.lla.com.hk www.llashanghai.com.cn

Thank You!

ShanghaiSmartCities2014 141016

Documents

Transcript of ShanghaiSmartCities2014 141016