How have Zurich and Vienna created efficient and attractive public transport systems?

1. Public Transport:
Zurich, Vienna & Online …
… @ GreenCityStreets.com
European ideas for Seattle?
Andrew Nash
andy@andynash.com
@andrewbnash

2. Presentation Outline
1. Context: Public transport is in trouble.
2. Zurich
3. Vienna
4. Online: GreenCityStreets.com
5. Questions and Discussion

3. 1. Context
Public transport is in trouble. We need it
more than ever …
– Global warming
– Demographic change
– Oil prices and shortages
– Rapid urbanization
… but have less money available to provide it.

4. Solution: Increase efficiency
More efficient public transport
reduces costs and increases revenues
How can we increase efficiency?
• Zurich – systematic approach
• Vienna – “brute force” approach
• Online – new media approach

5. 2. Zurich
A systematic approach for increasing public
transport efficiency:
– Public transport priority
– S-Bahn regional rail system (commuter rail)
– Coordinated ticketing and schedules
– Sustainable mobility program
An extremely effective combination.

7. Zurich: Facts and Figures
Economy
• Economic engine: generates 20% of Switzerland’s GDP
Population
• City: 378,000 (City Area 91.9 km2)
• Agglomeration: 1.25 million
• Metropolitan area: 1.68 million
• Greater Zurich Area: 3.2 million
Transport
• Motorisation: 376 Cars / 1000 Inhabitants
• Network public transport: 288 km
• Network streets: 740 km
• Network bike routes: 340 km
• Parking: public ground 51,000 ... private 220,000

8. Zurich: Public transport stuck in traffic
What’s to do?

9. Direct Democracy: Ballot Initiatives
• Tiefbahn (underground trams) – Defeated 1962
• U-Bahn/S-Bahn construction – Defeated 1973
• People’s initiative for public transport – Approved 1977
• S-Bahn and ZVV (coordinating agency) – Approved 1981

10. The Zurich Model: Public transport priority
implemented systematically throughout the network.
Exclusive public transport lanes
Signal priority – innovative approach
Results:
 Faster travel times
 Improved reliability
 Increased patronage
Incident management from control centre.
 Reduced costs

11. Erosion of Zurich Model
Problems
• Increasing travel times
• Lower reliability
• Higher costs
Centre city delays have
added 32,000 hours/year The fight for street
to travel time and
space begins anew.
increased cost of CHF 8
million for operations.

12. Regional Rail Network (S-Bahn)
• Opened in 1990
• Cost 2 billion CHF
• 420 km network
• 26 lines, 176 stops
• 950 trains per day
• Express & local trains
• 380,000 pass/day (city line)
• Ridership has increased
by 143% since 1990.
• System being expanded,
problem is railway capacity.
Photo: © SBB

14. Source: ZVV
Swiss Approach to Public Transport: Coordination
• Coordinated fares and common tickets
• Coordinated schedules
• Coordinated interchange locations

15. Coordinated Schedules (Swiss Taktfahrplan)
Source: SMA + Partner

16. Example of a regional hub: Wetzikon (rail)

17. Example of a regional hub: Wetzikon (bus)

18. Zurich’s sustainable mobility program
• Promote public transport
• Reduce and regulate parking
• Reduce private automobile traffic
• Improve conditions for pedestrians and bikes
• Develop ways to co-exist (shared space)
• Repair urban damage (freeway tunnels)
• Promote sustainable transport (behavior change)
• Network and share information with other cities

19. Reduce auto traffic: control traffic flow
• Traffic signals used
to control how much
traffic enters the city.
• Less traffic reduces
congestion for public
transport.
• Like ramp metering
for the whole city,
makes all traffic flow
more efficiently.

20. Zurich: selected program highlights
• Parking compromise: replace street parking with
underground parking.
• Low traffic streets (Limmatquai, Rennweg) politically
difficult but systematically implemented.
• Low speed zones in residential neighborhoods.
• Redesign squares/ intersections to be less
dominated by automobile traffic.
• Underground/ cover main roadways.
• Recognize need for co-existence and develop
appropriate facilities for automobiles.

21. Advertisement: parking control officers!

22. Equal Opportunity
Humor
Dear ladies: there are
still men, who are on-
time, gallantly open the
door for you and will
“un-aggressively” bring
you home afterwards.

23. 3. Vienna
A “brute force” approach to public transport efficiency:
– U-Bahn
– Trams
– Sustainable transport and livable neighborhoods
– Dialog for the future
Good policies, but difficult to implement in an
increasingly auto dependent region.

24. Vienna: Facts and Figures
Economy
• Economic, cultural and
government capital of Austria
Population
• City: 1.71 million (City Area 415 km2)
• Metropolitan area: 2.42 million
Transport
• Motorisation: 394 Cars / 1000 Inhabitants
• U-Bahn: 74 km (2010)
• Tram: 172 km (2010) – 74% exclusive lanes
• Bus: 622 km (2010) – 7.7% exclusive lanes
• Network bike routes: 1,206 km (most shared)

25. Vienna: Selected transport statistics
Mode Split
Goal: By 2020 … 75%
Sustainable Transport.
Public transport trips per day: … 2.3 million
PT Trip mode: … 63% U-Bahn, 23% Tram, 14% Bus
Annual PT trips per resident: … 490
Number of yearly passes sold: … 355,840

26. Vienna: Regional public transport network

27. Karlsplatz Stadtsbahn
Station by Otto Wagner.
Vienna U-Bahn
• U-Bahn is most important part of Vienna PT system.
• Joint City-Federal funding and planning.
• Sections are rebuilt from old tram and railway lines.

28. Vienna: U-Bahn

29. Vienna: Tram network

30. Vienna: Trams
Contra-flow lane on the Ring Shottentor transfer station
Ultra Low Floor (ULF) Tram Tram/bus exclusive lane

31. Vienna: City center public transport

32. Example: Neubau district traffic regulations
Traffic regulations used
to provide priority for
public transport.

33. Dialog: balancing competing needs
Planning improvements for
Mariahilfestrasse 2012.

34. 4. Online
How can we use information technology to help
increase public transport efficiency?
One approach: use games to educate and social
networking to build political support for controversial
projects.
But first, a small problem …

35. Unfortunately, this is the attitude in
many public transport agencies.

36. And, it’s probably right.
1. Public transport is complex
2. Often input is limited to:
– People & organizations with time to participate
in meetings
– People who benefit directly
– People fixated on public transport

37. On the other hand …
Project-based citizen involvement programs have
worked.
They have generated:
• Better ideas
• Political support for projects

38. But, project-based approaches have several
drawbacks …
• Limited time
• Limited scope (one project)
• Every project creates its own information
• Every project develops its own process/tools
• Expensive
Our solution: information technology …

39. More specifically, using IT to help
Re-think the role of citizens in government
New IT and communications technologies will redefine the
role of citizens in all aspects of government.
The goal isn't data, culture, accountability or efficiency, it's
building a community to work together to solve problems.
How will we create these communities?

40. Two approaches:
1. Identify problems
2. Participate in planning

44. Identifying problems is important but
we could be doing more.
Moving beyond reporting.

46. Participatory
Chinatown
Boston

47. GreenCityStreets is an
integrated application using
Web 2.0 techniques to:
• Educate people about sustainable transport,
• Create a forum for submitting ideas, and
• Provide tools enabling public transport
agencies to effectively use and respond to input.

48. BusMeister Game: A fun way to learn about public transport.

49. BusMeister wiki: For learning the details.

50. GreenCityStreets blog: Top level pages and news.

51. GreenCityStreets Forum: Social network for public transport.

52. The prototype works:
• BusMeister is fun
• You can play on Facebook
• Forum is online
• Best Practices Library
has many pages of information
But no one is using it … why not?

53. Prototype identified several problems
• Fun game, but complex user interface
• Social network limited to Facebook users
• Hard to get people to contribute to the best practices
wiki
• Website organization is suboptimal
But most importantly …

54. Our business model was wrong …
BusMeister may be fun, but it’s no Farmville and
besides, a game alone won’t attract enough people to
accomplish our goal of improved public transport.
To be successful GreenCityStreets needs a sponsor:
• Public transport agency
• Advocacy group
• Newspaper or media

55. But, if this is the attitude,

56. Or, as one agency told us …
“Why would we buy something that
lets passengers complain
about our service?”
What’s to be done?

57. The answer is another question:
When is a complaint not a complaint?
(When you use it.)
Innovative companies use customer input to:
• Develop new products
• Improve existing products
• Build relationships and loyalty

58. Why not try this in public transport?
• Better ideas
– Detailed neighborhood knowledge
– Fresh perspective (why not?)
• Clear show of political support for controversial plans
(like bus lanes)
• Creates committed customers - people who have a
stake in public transport

59. Won’t this generate extra work?
No, you’ll respond more efficiently to public input:
– Refer to best practices library
– On-going record of complaints & responses
– Committed citizens monitor Forum
– Agency input tracking application will help
No, but it will change the work you do:
– Taking input seriously means planning differently
– And, it means building real relationships too

60. But, most importantly …
Community-based planning will happen:
– Applications are being developed;
– Technology is improving;
– We have many examples of “impossible”
community-based applications (wikipedia).

61. The real question is …
Will transport agencies lead the way
… or follow?

62. Wanted: Innovative public
transport agency interested
in working closely with
customers in making service
more attractive and efficient
contact: GreenCityStreets.com

63. 5. Discussion and Questions
www.greencitystreets.com
Andrew Nash
andy@andynash.com
www.andynash.com
@andrewbnash