Investing in the city Lessons from 47 light-rail projects

Transcription

1 Investing in the city Lessons from 47 light-rail projects Niels van Oort Assistant professor public transport Transport and Planning Public Transport Consultant Goudappel Coffeng Rob v/d Bijl Independent urban planner RVDB Urban Planning/Lightrail.nl Bert Bukman Publicist 1

2 Research Motivation Light rail has been successfully implemented in many urban regions worldwide. There is much debate on the (societal) cost-benefit ratio of these systems. Several light rail projects were not that successful or even failed. In recent years, many light rail plans have been cancelled after many years of planning after the start of the tendering process during trial operation. The Netherlands 1997: the Dutch government noted about 30 light rail initiatives. 2014: only one of them is actually in operation, being the RandstadRail line in The Hague and Rotterdam. 2

3 Light rail TRB 1978: Light rail transit is a metropolitan electric railway system characterized by its ability to operate single cars or short trains along exclusive rights-of-way at ground level, on aerial structures, in subways or, occasionally, in streets, and to board and discharge passengers at track or car-floor level. TRAIN LIGHT RAIL TRAM METRO 3

4 General findings: succes (1/3) Project conception Define the basic project as small as possible Conceive project s long term and context as comprehensively as possible, hence, elaborate its economic, social and environmental value; Focus on why the project (short term and long term); Elaborate and manage project rind (context, future). Project organization A strong independent project organization; Different organizations for different stages of the projects; One part of the organization is continuously focusing on safeguarding the project as such. 4

5 General findings succes (2/3) Politics Enhance and safeguard political decision making by chopping the project into smaller pieces; Accept and apply incremental planning; Transparency during all decision making processes; All decisions made should be supported by a major political support; The timeframe of contracts for the project must be consistent with political timeframes; Aim at creating faits accomplis. Do not allow (new generation) politics to question again the value and progress of the project at stake. 5

6 General findings succes (3/3) Communication Residents and citizens must be involved in the project; Every available form of communication must be used; Stakeholders must be personally involved. 6

7 General findings: failure (1/2) Project conception Changing the scope and thus the targets; Interfaces with related projects or between components of the project itself; Too few project variants or alternatives. Solutions for a good project are often found in the combination of different alternatives. Project organization Innovative public tendering (e.g. DBFMO and alike) comes with risks; Focus on costs is important, but costs are not the most important part of the project. 7

8 General findings failure (2/2) Politics Uncertainty in relations between different governmental layers; Changing political climate; Approaching the project as a development on its own; Only focusing on the most desired alternative leads to the displacements of other feasible alternatives; Communication A technocratic attitude jeopardizes the project; Neglecting citizens involvement is dangerous. 8

9 Justification of light rail Framework of 5 E s - Efficiency - Effectiveness - Environment - Economy - Equity SMART CITIES 9

10 Why light rail? Why public transport? Efficiency (network and operations) - Meeting demand - Optimizing operational costs - Use of (public) space - Quality of service - Railbonus (Bunschoten et. al) 10

11 Why light rail? Why public transport? Effectiveness (urban design) - All kinds of (indirect) effects: - Urban planning & design - (Restructuring) the city - Quality of the city - Livability - Safety - Image & perception of the city 11

12 Why light rail? Why public transport? Environment - More efficient regarding: - Energy consumption - (Direct) emissions - Land use 12

13 Why light rail? Why public transport? Economy - Land value - Real estate value - Retail turnover & quality - Employment - Property development 13

14 Why light rail? Why public transport? Equity - Social access & connection: - Contra-segregation - Social mobility 14

15 Example RandstadRail 15

16 RandstadRail: The Hague About passengers per day Two lines; 33 and 27 km 41 and 31 stops 5 min headway per line per direction 16

17 Focus on service reliability High level of quality and reliability In urban area Poor punctuality Poor regularity High number of vehicles per hour per direction (>24) Signalling applied: limited capacity Shared tracks with tram and metro Operational targets of transit authority 17

18 Main elements Preventing unplanned stopping Punctuality Dwelling (vehicles and stops) Timetable Dispatching room 18

19 Actual effects Average dwell time 28 s 24 s Standard deviation - 70% Average delay 90 s 20 s Departure punctuality: 70% 93% <-1,+1> Driving ahead of schedule: 50% 7% <,0> Customer satisfaction: 6.7->7.4 Ridership growth: ~30% 19

20 Conclusions RandstadRail: High frequent light rail in an urban area High reliability because of controlling operations Ridership growth due to substantial quality leap How to incorporate quality improvements in decision making and planning? 20

21 Example efficiency Actual case Uithoflijn Utrecht 21

22 Decision making in public transport Most PT projects aim at enhanced reliability Service reliability is often missing in CBA and transport models We developed: Methodology to incorporate passenger impacts of service reliability: Transport models (reliable forecasts) Cost benefit analyses Applied in Utrecht Calculated 0% Expert judgment 13% Not 60% Qualitatively 27% 22

23 Case: Uithoflijn (line 12) Central Station City of Utrecht De Uithof - University - Hospital Utrecht - Centrally located in the Netherlands - 4 th largest city inhabitants 23

24 Problem analysis Busiest bus line in the Netherlands: passengers per day Frequency of 23x/hour/direction using double-articulated buses: 30x/hour/direction necessary Poor reliability and lack of capacity Mobility is still growing +25% planned property in the Uithof: students, employees Total: students, employees and visitors (hospital) No additional parking space Demand forecast: passenger per day Solution - Introduction of a light rail line: 16-20x/hour 24

25 Poor reliability -Scheduled headway Frequentie Intervallen [s] -Headway [s] -Dwell time [s] -Avg. =2,5 min; σ= 1,3 min 25

26 New tram line -12 connected CAF vehicles (2x37,5 m) 7,5 km Operations are planned to start in

27 Ministry requires CBA - Regional parties agreed with plans and finances million of Minister of Transport available (about 1/3 of total costs) CBA > 1,0 YES NO + 27

28 Our approach Calculations of: Future demand, including tram bonus impacts Costs (infrastructure and operations) Benefits Travel time gains Reliability gains 28

29 Results CBA Additional waiting time due to unreliability Distribution of travel time due to unreliability Service reliability effects are over >60% of all benefits! This method was approved by the Dutch Ministry and the Minister provided the 110 million 29

30 Conclusions Little attention to service reliability in cost-benefit analyses Translation of vehicle to passenger effects Research and case proves: It is possible to quantify service reliability and calculate the monetary value Service reliability benefits made the difference This method was approved by the Dutch Ministry and the Minister provided the 110 million 30

31 Summary General Lessons from light rail projects: justification and broader scope than transport Framework of 5 E s Efficiency Effectiveness Economy Environment Equity Smart City Cases Light rail enables increase in service reliability Little attention to service reliability in cost-benefit analyses Service reliability benefits made the difference in Utrecht 31

32 Questions? MSc-project or internship? Niels van Oort Research papers: EMTA report: Light rail explained -> Publications -> Surveys Our book 32