Public Transport Efficiency: Zurich, Vienna and On-Line


Published on

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

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Public Transport Efficiency: Zurich, Vienna and On-Line

  1. 1. Public Transport:Zurich, Vienna & Online …… @ European ideas for Seattle? Andrew Nash @andrewbnash
  2. 2. Presentation Outline1.  Context: Public transport is in trouble.2.  Zurich3.  Vienna4.  Online: GreenCityStreets.com5.  Questions and Discussion
  3. 3. 1. ContextPublic transport is in trouble. We need itmore than ever … –  Global warming –  Demographic change –  Oil prices and shortages –  Rapid urbanization… but have less money available to provide it.
  4. 4. Solution: Increase efficiencyMore efficient public transportreduces costs and increases revenuesHow can we increase efficiency? •  Zurich – systematic approach •  Vienna – “brute force” approach •  Online – new media approach
  5. 5. 2. ZurichA systematic approach for increasing publictransport efficiency: –  Public transport priority –  S-Bahn regional rail system (commuter rail) –  Coordinated ticketing and schedules –  Sustainable mobility programAn extremely effective combination.
  6. 6. Zurich: Facts and FiguresEconomy •  Economic engine: generates 20% of Switzerland’s GDPPopulation •  City: 378,000 (City Area 91.9 km2) •  Agglomeration: 1.25 million •  Metropolitan area: 1.68 million •  Greater Zurich Area: 3.2 millionTransport •  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
  7. 7. Zurich: Public transport stuck in traffic What’s to do?
  8. 8. 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
  9. 9. The Zurich Model: Public transport priorityimplemented systematically throughout the network.Exclusive public transport lanes Signal priority – innovative approach Results:   Faster travel times   Improved reliability   Increased patronageIncident management from control centre.   Reduced costs
  10. 10. Erosion of Zurich ModelProblems•  Increasing travel times•  Lower reliability•  Higher costsCentre city delays haveadded 32,000 hours/year The fight for streetto travel time and space begins anew.increased cost of CHF 8million for operations.
  11. 11. 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
  12. 12. Source: ZVVSwiss Approach to Public Transport: Coordination•  Coordinated fares and common tickets•  Coordinated schedules•  Coordinated interchange locations
  13. 13. Coordinated Schedules (Swiss Taktfahrplan) Source: SMA + Partner
  14. 14. Example of a regional hub: Wetzikon (rail)
  15. 15. Example of a regional hub: Wetzikon (bus)
  16. 16. 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
  17. 17. 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.
  18. 18. 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.
  19. 19. Advertisement: parking control officers!
  20. 20. Equal Opportunity HumorDear ladies: there arestill men, who are on-time, gallantly open thedoor for you and will“un-aggressively” bringyou home afterwards.
  21. 21. 3. ViennaA “brute force” approach to public transport efficiency: –  U-Bahn –  Trams –  Sustainable transport and livable neighborhoods –  Dialog for the futureGood policies, but difficult to implement in anincreasingly auto dependent region.
  22. 22. Vienna: Facts and FiguresEconomy•  Economic, cultural and government capital of AustriaPopulation•  City: 1.71 million (City Area 415 km2)•  Metropolitan area: 2.42 millionTransport•  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)
  23. 23. Vienna: Selected transport statisticsMode SplitGoal: 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
  24. 24. Vienna: Regional public transport network
  25. 25. Karlsplatz StadtsbahnStation 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.
  26. 26. Vienna: U-Bahn
  27. 27. Vienna: Tram network
  28. 28. Vienna: TramsContra-flow lane on the Ring Shottentor transfer stationUltra Low Floor (ULF) Tram Tram/bus exclusive lane
  29. 29. Vienna: City center public transport
  30. 30. Example: Neubau district traffic regulationsTraffic regulations usedto provide priority forpublic transport.
  31. 31. Dialog: balancing competing needs Planning improvements for Mariahilfestrasse 2012.
  32. 32. 4. OnlineHow can we use information technology to helpincrease public transport efficiency?One approach: use games to educate and socialnetworking to build political support for controversialprojects. But first, a small problem …
  33. 33. Unfortunately, this is the attitude in many public transport agencies.
  34. 34. 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
  35. 35. On the other hand …Project-based citizen involvement programs haveworked.They have generated: •  Better ideas •  Political support for projects
  36. 36. But, project-based approaches have severaldrawbacks …•  Limited time•  Limited scope (one project)•  Every project creates its own information•  Every project develops its own process/tools•  Expensive Our solution: information technology …
  37. 37. More specifically, using IT to helpRe-think the role of citizens in governmentNew IT and communications technologies will redefine therole of citizens in all aspects of government.The goal isnt data, culture, accountability or efficiency, itsbuilding a community to work together to solve problems. How will we create these communities?
  38. 38. Two approaches: 1.  Identify problems 2.  Participate in planning
  39. 39. Identifying problems is important butwe could be doing more. Moving beyond reporting.
  40. 40. Participatory Chinatown Boston
  41. 41. GreenCityStreets is anintegrated application usingWeb 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.
  42. 42. BusMeister Game: A fun way to learn about public transport.
  43. 43. BusMeister wiki: For learning the details.
  44. 44. GreenCityStreets blog: Top level pages and news.
  45. 45. GreenCityStreets Forum: Social network for public transport.
  46. 46. The prototype works:•  BusMeister is fun•  You can play on Facebook•  Forum is online•  Best Practices Library has many pages of informationBut no one is using it … why not?
  47. 47. 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 …
  48. 48. Our business model was wrong …BusMeister may be fun, but it’s no Farmville andbesides, a game alone won’t attract enough people toaccomplish our goal of improved public transport.To be successful GreenCityStreets needs a sponsor: •  Public transport agency •  Advocacy group •  Newspaper or media
  49. 49. But, if this is the attitude,
  50. 50. Or, as one agency told us … “Why would we buy something that lets passengers complain about our service?” What’s to be done?
  51. 51. 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
  52. 52. 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
  53. 53. 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 helpNo, but it will change the work you do: –  Taking input seriously means planning differently –  And, it means building real relationships too
  54. 54. 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).
  55. 55. The real question is … Will transport agencies lead the way … or follow?
  56. 56. Wanted: Innovative publictransport agency interestedin working closely withcustomers in making servicemore attractive and efficientcontact:
  57. 57. 5. Discussion and Andrew Nash @andrewbnash