technical workshop intermodality mom 070307 v1 · traveller security and anti -terrorism security...

PPRREEPPAARRAATTIIOONN OOFF AA GGRREEEENN PPAAPPEERR OONN UURRBBAANNTTRRAANNSSPPOORRTT

TTHHIIRRDD TTEECCHHNNIICCAALL WWOORRKKSSHHOOPP:: ""PPUUBBLLIICC TTRRAANNSSPPOORRTT,,IINNTTEERRMMOODDAALLIITTYY AANNDD IINNTTEELLLLIIGGNNEETT TTRRAANNSSPPOORRTT""

MMIINNUUTTEESS OOFF MMEEEETTIINNGG

CCOONNTTRRAACCTT TTRREENN//CCCC//0055--22000055//0066//88//SS0077..6677113311

7/3/2007

T e c h n i c a l w o r k s h o p " P u b l i c t r a n s p o r t , i n t e r m o d a l i t y a n d i n t e l l i g e n tt r a n s p o r t " : M i n u t e s o f m e e t i n g

ii

MVV Consulting - Tractebel Development Engineering Technical Workshop_Intermodality_MoM_070307_V1.doc

TABLE OF CONTENT

LIST OF ABREVIATIONS IV

1. PROGRAMME 1

2. OPENING 3

2.1 SUMMARY OF THE PRESENTATIONS 3

3. FIRST SESSION: EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF PUBLICTRANSPORT 5


3.2 SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSIONS AND OPINIONS FROM THE INVITEDSTAKEHOLDERS 12

4. SECOND SESSION: INTERMODALITY IN URBAN AREAS, SAFETYAND SECURITY 15



5. THIRD SESSION: INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMS 22



6. FOURTH SESSION: ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE AND NOISE 33



7. CONCLUSIONS, SUMMING UP 45

APPENDIX: PRESENTATION SLIDES 46


iii


Disclaimer

Neither the European Commission, nor any person acting on behalf of theCommission, is responsible for the use which might be made of the informationcontained in this document. The views expressed in this document have not beenadopted or in any way approved by the Commission and should not be relied uponas a statement of the Commission's views.


iv


LIST OF ABREVIATIONS

CEEC's Central and Eastern Europe Countries

CO2 Carbon dioxide

EIB European Investment Bank

ERDF European Regional Development Fund

EU 15 EU Members that joined the EU before 2004

EU 25 EU Members that joined the EU before 2007

EU 27 Current EU Members (2007)

IT Information technology

ITS Intelligent Transportation System

LTZ Limited Traffic Zone

MS Member State

PPP Public Private Partnership

PT Public Transport

PTA Public Transport Authority

STIF Syndicat des Transports d'Ile-de-France

TEN-T Trans European Networks – Transport

WHO World Health Organisation


1


1. PROGRAMME

Technical Workshop: "Public transport, intermodality and intelligent transport"

Date: 7 March 2007

Location: Szentendre, Hungary

Organised with the support of the Hungarian Ministry for Economy and Transport, theRegional Environmental Center (REC), the PARAMOUNT project.

9.15 Opening, welcome

� Mr Zoltan Kazatsay, Deputy Director General, Directorate for Energy and Transport,European Commission

� Mrs Marta Szigeti Bonifert, Executive Director, REC

9.40 First session - efficiency and effectiveness of public transport

� Mr. Béla Kilyénfalvi (ING Bank)Managing traffic risk in PPP projects

� Mrs Sabine Avril, Secretary General, European Metropolitan Transport Authorities(EMTA)Efficiency and effectiveness of urban public transport – authority perspective

� Mr Botond Aba, Budapest, repr. International Association of Public Transport (UITP)Efficiency and effectiveness of urban public transport – operator perspective

11.20 Second session – intermodality in urban areas, safety and security

� Javier Aldecoa, Consorcio de Transportes de MadridIntermodality, interchange and Park and Ride in Madrid

� Maria Wass-Danielsen, City of Copenhagen, member of the Eurocities working groupon road safetyRoad safety: local trends, organisation, enforcement, practical actions

� Mrs Andrea Soehnchen, International Association of Public Transport (UITP)Traveller security and anti-terrorism security in urban public transport

13.40 Third session - intelligent transport systems

� Mr Ken Laughlin, Hampshire County CouncilThe role of ITS in provision of safe and sustainable urban transport

� Mrs Christelle Godinho, Mobility Agency of the City of ParisA policy driven approach to intelligent urban transport systems

� Mr Alexio Picco, AMI, GenoaHow to practically implement and manage intelligent urban transport systems

� Mr Janos Monigl, Transman Consulting, BudapestElectronic ticketing for ensuring interoperability and managing public transportservices


2


15.25 Fourth session - environmental performance and noise

� Mr Tamás Fleischer, Hungarian Academy of SciencesSustainable and liveable cities - a vision

� Mrs Nina Renshaw, Transport and Environment (T&E)Air pollution from transport in cities: problems and solutions

� Michael Jaecker-Cueppers, Federal Environmental Agency, Germany, representative ofthe CALM projectNoise from transport in cities: problems and solutions

16.40 Conclusions, summing up


3


2. OPENING

2.1 SUMMARY OF THE PRESENTATIONS

2.1.1 Presentation of Mr Zoltan Kazatsay, DeputyDirector General, Directorate for Energyand Transport, European Commission

Mr Kazatsay welcomes the participants and thanks the organisers of the workshop, namelythe Ministry for Economy and Transport of Hungary and the Regional EnvironmentalCentre (REC).

Mr Kazatsay recalls the different steps for the preparation of the Green Paper on UrbanTransport and the future conferences and workshops which will be organised.

Concerning the Green Paper itself, if the EU wants to achieve its objectives of economiccompetitiveness, mobility and safety in transport, it cannot "just" focus on the TransEuropean Networks, considering that 80% of Europeans live and work in urban centres.

Moreover, urban transport is a main source of pollution and of greenhouse gases intransport. So urban transport should be included in the EU policy focus, in order to respondeffectively to the new demands to fight climate change and pollution.

Mr Kazatsay recalls the main messages that were brought back from the stakeholders'conference held on January 31st 2007 in Brussels.

The first clear message was that there is a broad support for the initiative to prepare a GreenPaper. There was a consensus on the need for a joint approach.

During the presentations, subsidiarity was considered not as an obstacle, but rather as achallenge and an opportunity that could enrich actions taken at different levels, be it local,regional, national or European.

The added value of action at European level can be to promote the sharing of good practicesand can also involve harmonization, better coordination and cooperation, financial support,simplification of existing legislation, or in certain cases, introduction of new legislation. Theidea is not to impose solutions but to enable recipients to develop their urban transportsignificantly.

There was also a unanimous agreement on the need for an integrated approach. Urbantransport should not continue to be governed by other EU policies such as environment,internal market, regional policy, research, etc. In order to lead to "win-win" situations, urbantransport should be integrated into the broader transport policy framework and linked with,for instance, European energy policy regarding greenhouse gas emissions in urban areas,clean vehicle issues, use of alternative fuels.

The importance of the EU Regional policy was stressed: the need for financial support forpublic transport through the Structural funds, the Cohesion funds and other innovativeinstruments is essential for a successful urban transport policy.


4


Mr Kazatsay recalls that a public consultation has been launched on the Internet and that itwill remain open until the end of April.

The Green Paper will be prepared early in the autumn. It will be followed by an action planproposing more concrete measures for further consideration.

Mr Kazatsay summarises the main issues at stake during the present workshop along thefollowing main questions:

� Where and how can we, at the EU level, add value to what is being done at local level?

� Are there obstacles at the EU level which the EC needs to remove?

� What are the areas where there is a consensus to develop joint European solutions?

2.1.2 Presentation of Mrs Marta Szigeti Bonifert,Executive Director, REC

Mrs Bonifert presents the Regional Environmental Center. The presentation slides areattached in appendix of the present document.

Mrs Bonifert recalls that the REC works very closely with the municipalities.

She wishes a very successful meeting to all the participants.


5


3. FIRST SESSION: EFFICIENCY ANDEFFECTIVENESS OF PUBLICTRANSPORT


3.1.1 Presentation on managing traffic risk inPPP projects by Mr. Béla Kilyénfalvi (INGBank)

The slides of Mr Kilyénfalvi's presentation are attached in appendix of the presentdocument. Mr Kilyénfalvi highlights the following issues:

Mr Kilyénfalvi is advising the State sector, mainly for PPP motorway projects. Heunderlines that urban projects are much more complex than motorway projects and presentsthe key concerns related to the evaluation of traffic risks.

� There are 4 possible traffic risk bearing options:

– Full traffic risk – complete reliance on real tolls or fares paid by users

– Mix of real tolls / fares and direct subsidies from public sector

– Shadow toll / fare payments from public sector

– No net traffic risk – availability payments from public sector

� What are the implications of traffic risk in PPP Projects?

– Procurement costs and timetable

– Value for money (NB: the method of financing has budgetary implications)

– Government budget

– Recovering user benefits

– Political considerations

– Diversion of traffic to competing routes / modes.

� Concerning procurement:

– Private sector bearing ANY net traffic risk

. lengthens procurement

. adds to tender costs

– Tenderers and financiers require robust traffic projections

. detailed analysis

. extensive surveys

. complex modelling


6


– Example of the M6 in Hungary, which works under the availability model withouttraffic risk for the private investor. The closing of the project only took 11 months.The same project with shadow tolls would have taken 2 to 3 years.

� Concerning value for money:

– Financiers particularly require

. conservative projections (which might possibly destroy value for money)

. higher returns and cover ratios,

for bearing traffic risk.

– Predictability is vital

. especially in urban environment (new public transport projects are competingwith each other)

. any element of tolls / fares involves uncertainty over willingness to pay

� Strengths and weaknesses of project options:

– Real tolls / fares paid by users (Advantages: (+), disadvantages: (-))

. (+) Favoured by EU (user pays)

. (+) Minimal impact on Government budget

. (-) Full tolls / fares can cause political problems

. (-) High diversion of traffic to competing routes / modes

. (-) High private sector risk premium

. (-) Lengthy procurement

– Mix of tolls / fares and subsidies

. (+) User pays

. (+) Tolls / Fares more affordable

. (+) Subsidy for non-user benefits

. (+) Low impact on public sector budget

. (-) Politics still an issue

. (-) Some diversion of traffic to competing routes / modes

. (-) Private sector risk premium


– Shadow tolls / fares paid by public sector

. (+) No issue of willingness to pay

. (+) No diversion to competing routes / modes

. (+) Private sector still bears traffic risk

. (-) Greatest impact on Government budget

. (-) User benefits not recovered


7


. (-) Private sector risk premium (low) (The private sector runs the traffic risk,without having the freedom to adapt the toll level in function of demand)


– Availability payments (Such model is followed so far in Hungary. For the M5project, heavy traffic has been underestimated, which causes serious maintenanceproblems)

. (+) No issue of willingness to pay

. (+) No diversion to competing routes / modes

. (+) No private sector risk premium

. (+) Shortest procurement

. (-) High impact on budget

. (-) User benefits not recovered

– Conclusion

. Private sector bearing traffic risk in PPP projects

. (-) lengthens procurement and adds to costs

. (-) worsens value for money

. (-) can result in diversion to competing routes / modes

. BUT (if tolls / fares charged to users)

. (+) can minimise budget contribution

. (+) enables user benefits to be captured

� Conclusion

– Consider subsidies to cover non-user benefits

– Consider minimum revenue guarantees to reduce traffic risk

– Availability Payments target Governments aims for Project

– Artificial structures (shadow tolls, congestion charges) are generally unattractive.

For municipalities, the allocation of risks is a key to success. Traffic is a very sensitive issuefor PPP in urban transport.

3.1.2 Presentation on efficiency andeffectiveness of urban public transport –authority perspective by Mrs Sabine Avril,Secretary General, European MetropolitanTransport Authorities (EMTA)

The slides of Mrs Avril's presentation are attached in appendix of the present document. MrsAvril presents the following experiences from the EMTA members.


8


3.1.2.1 Analysis of costs in contracts (Stuttgart)

� The context

– Stuttgart and the counties around are PTAs

– The Stuttgart region is responsible for financing bus services

– In Stuttgart city , public owned SSB is operating bus services

– The present contracts started in 1994 and are open-ended

– Region and PTAs decided not to tender but to comply with 4 criteria

� Objectives are

– find out if the 38 operators are a typical well run undertaking

– make sure compensation doesn't exceed legal level

� Analysis

– Assess precisely the quantity of service delivered in terms of departures, servicekilometres, drivers hour in service, ….

– Assess all cost elements and per element the average cost per service–km

– Compare to typical costs (based on real market price or benchmarking)

� PTAs evaluate new level of provision

� Discussions take place with 38 operators

– About level of provision if relevant

– Preliminary costs have been determined, negotiation will take place if need ofchange

� New contracts will be issued

– The compliance with other 3 criteria will be ensured

– New contracts to be issued spring 2007

3.1.2.2 IT for integration (Helsinki)

� Foreseen benefits of E-ticketing are clear

– For Authorities:

. Opportunity to achieve mobility in cities

. Modern approach and new services

. Seamless journeys multi modal and multi-networks

. Better control of revenues and subsidies

– For operators:

. Gain new customers with new service

. Increase speed at boarding

. Source of marketing data for public transport management


9


– For customers:

. Convenience and speed

. Seamless journeys

. Possibly additional services

� Difficulties to overcome

– Contactless is more than a technical project

– Needs the agreement of all parties involved but strategies might diverge

– Need for funding

– Need of a champion at highest level

� YTV Helsinki- 2nd generation of contactless travel cards

– YTV present system:

. In use since 2002, across 4 municipalities

. Integrates bus, trams, metro, commuter trains and ferries

. 1 mio passengers/day and 1 mio cards issued

– and the second generation by 2014:

. Life cycle ends, need to update and extend

. New travel card + passenger real time information system

. Reloading Cards through internet, use of mobile phone as tickets

. Monitoring of the running costs

. Collecting useful data.

3.1.2.3 Social inclusion (Paris region)

� Allobus - Roissy is a 24/24 hours service to serve Paris-CDG Airport platform from 9communities around with 4 bus lines on a demand responsive scheme

– mix between demand responsive transport and regular lines operated by minibuses

– Funding gathers the concerned municipalities and County (Département), Aéroportde Paris, bus operator and STIF

– Launched in 1999 , 2nd contract 2006

– Increase ridership 200 000 users to 600 000

– Positive results with regard to social inclusion and safety

– But expensive so partially mixed with fix lines

– Discussions to expand towards more municipalities

� Night bus lines

– 40 lines, 2000 bus stops

– 200 cities served across Paris Region

– Through the night

– Increase in ridership


10


– Main reason is working shift hours

– Quality and security appreciated

3.1.2.4 Tackling congestion (Stockholm)

� Congestion tax trial lasted for 7 month ending July 2006

� Major challenge for SL Stockholm transport authority

– Increase of provision of 7% in a 1 year delay

– Extended tracks and more bus services, new depots, more bike and ride facilities

� Continuous monitoring to collect data and knowledge before and after

– Anticipation from the population: 10 to 15% would use more public transport infact 6%-8% only did

– Patronage increased by 6% (half of it on metro)

� Travelers behaviours, quality of service and satisfaction monitored all along

– Level of satisfaction higher on bus than metro

– Relief in traffic made bus more attractive especially new direct routes

– Punctuality and spare time

� The role of the transport authority is crucial when taking measures to tackle congestion

3.1.2.5 Conclusion

� European Metropolitan Transport Authorities demonstrate their ability to constantlyadapt to new situations and to design new solutions taking advantage of the localcontext

� Nevertheless they call for actions from European Commission in the fields of:

– harmonisation of standards and data collection (EMTA publishes a barometer, forwhich it faces problems of data definitions and content)

– Better dissemination of good practices

– Definition of guidelines for a fair infrastructure charge

– Implementation of legal framework making possible at local level to bettercoordinate land use policy and transport planning, in due respect of subsidiarity.

3.1.3 Presentation on efficiency andeffectiveness of urban public transport –operator perspective by Mr Botond Aba,Budapest, representing the InternationalAssociation of Public Transport (UITP)

The slides of Mr Aba's presentation are attached in appendix of the present document.


11


� As an introduction, Mr Aba highlights the following issues:

– The way of development and the basis for the economy are completely different inthe new EU Member States, compared to the EU-15. Therefore, it is difficult toharmonize methodologies, development plans, etc., at the European level.

– Pressure is enormous to reduce costs and to maximise the efficiency of publictransport.

– Public transport can be seen as consuming funds from the State budget, whereasprivate transport contributes to the State budget through taxes on fuel.

– At the European level and at the national or local political level, the focus is onnew investments in public transport and very little on practical issues of its dailyoperation.

� Considering the ever rising trend of motorisation in Europe and in the World, publictransport faces an enormous competition from private cars.

� Efficiency as a target of investor

– Depends on the type of ownership

. publicly owned: cost and subsidy reduction (everywhere, except in Hong Kongand Singapore, subsidies are required for profit making)

. private company: sufficient profit? Return on equity, on assets?

– World Bank covenant: 100 % operational ratio = non profit undertaking ?

� Profitability (What is the profitability level of public transport? This has to be discussedand defined)

– 1. Altmark-Case; 3rd principle: What’s a „reasonable profit”?

– 2. Warranted dividend (2-3%) Hamburg

– 3. WB: Operational ratio = 100 %

– 4. Real result: Cost recovery = 20-80 % (differs from city to city)

– There’s a strong need among operators to define clear requirement andperformance indicators esp. under competitive circumstances!

� Loss making, underfinanced or non-profit sector?

– Loss making

. accounting category

. operational ratio below 100

. company could be stable by cash-flow and operationally

. chance for appearance of internal debt

– Underfinanced

. financial category (operation, investment or in both aspects)

. liquidity problems (occasional, permanent)

. undercapitalized company

. forced credit, debt service spiral

– Non-profit social service sector?

– Or listed on the stock exchange?


12


� Effectiveness as a target of passenger (and local authority)

– Accessibility- network density, real-time information, service for handicapped,interoperability

– Availability - capacity, frequency, reliability, flexibility

– Attractivity – safety, comfort, travel time, cost-value rate, extra services

– Cost level of private car – fuel, road-pricing (correlated to public transportpatronage)

� General conclusion

– Harmonization of actual legislation (region)

– Introduction of the new European market regulation with reflecting KPI-s (Keyperformance indicators)

– Clarification of existing tripartite responsibilities (namely: authorities, operators,State and regions)

– Generally established transport organising authorities – obligatory cooperation

– New financing structures in the fully harmonized interoperability (There is nosense to have competition among public transport modes. In Hungary, there is ahidden competition among the three players).

– Subsidiarity in the sectoral/regional market regulation

– European Codex for passengers and operators

– To achieve the secure financial background of a cohesionally balanced publictransport service

– To internalize the external cost effects on the market – especially the environmentaldamages

– 100 % cost recovery for PT operators with a modest profitability (to be defined)

– Balanced investment and operational policy

– Involvement of new financial resources

– Harmonized public and individual financing

– Demand to differ metropolises, medium size cities and villages

3.2 SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSIONS AND OPINIONSFROM THE INVITED STAKEHOLDERS

3.2.1 Mrs Duchène, representative of the GART

Mrs Duchène wants to reinforce what has been said by Mrs Avril on standardisation, whichis also needed for ticketing and information. This represents many systems and it raises theissue of their interoperability.

Concerning the production of performance indicators, there is a need for data with the samedefinition and the same collection specifications.

Concerning performance indicators in France, the results of the works carried out by theGART in this regard are available.


13


With reference to Mr. Aba's presentation, Mrs Duchène underlines that financing ofinvestment and operation is required, and that quality depends on it.

3.2.2 Mr. Ensink, representative of the ECF

Mr. Ensink stresses the point of the harmonisation of data collection which should alsocover cycling and not only public transport.

Mr. Ensink raises a question for Mrs. Avril on the existence of any experience in integratingaspects concerning cycling in e-ticketing, like parking, renting or use of public transport.

3.2.3 Mrs Avril, representative of the EMTA

Renting of bicycles is quite developed in cities like Paris and others. There might be apossibility to integrate contactless cards with other services. This is studied but apparentlynot yet implemented.

3.2.4 Mrs Kardacz (DG TREN)

Mrs Kardacz mentions that an e-ticketing system that can be used for bicycle parking andfor public transport exists in Odense (Denmark). It has been developed as part of a Civitas-Mobilis project.

3.2.5 Mrs Duchène

Mrs Duchène mentions that in Lyon a bicycle can be rented with a monthly public transportticket.

3.2.6 Mrs Ollier representative of the UITP

Concerning e-ticketing and information of travellers, many networks are developing theirown system so that the chance of a common EU initiative is fading. The UITP looks to findinteroperability of the systems, not to create a single system.

Concerning passengers rights, which are a component of the railway package underpreparation, the European Parliament has asked for their extension from the internationalpart of railway travel to the whole market. It will therefore concern 80 to 90% ofpassengers, including suburban travel, instead of 9 to 10%.

Concerning data collection, there is no harmonisation in Europe. The UITP has developed adata base by collecting comparable data in various cities across Europe. For other data, thecontent is not harmonised. Therefore there is the need for an EU proposal to help the UITPcollect comparable common indicators.


14


3.2.7 Representative of the UNIFE

Concerning passengers' information, in Germany journeys can be planned and booked fromdoor to door for all modes of transport on the Internet. The system is similar to the one ofLondon and is used by the UIC.

3.2.8 Mrs Billiet representative of the IRU

Mrs Billiet fears that public transport is over dependent on public means and funds. Publictransport operators should be encouraged to increase their patronage and involve the privatesector more than today. The private sector is necessary for public transport and authoritieswhich do everything to keep the private sector out of public transport follow a wrongapproach.

3.2.9 Mr Jakič, representative of the city ofLjubljana

Mr Jakič is in favour of cross border ticketing. In Ljubljana, special technology using e-ticketing and GSM has been developed locally and could be brought throughout the EU.However, it is impossible to pay a parking fee in Budapest with a Slovenian GSM,considering the existing high roaming costs applied. An initiative should be taken in thisfield by the DG TREN and the other DGs concerned.

3.2.10 Mr Aymerich, representative of the EIB

Concerning urban public transport PPP projects, traffic risks should always be minimised,for the following reasons:

� taking into account the nature of urban development, banks do not like to haveuncertainties

� the tariff structure of public transport is always politically decided and supported bysubsidies

� subsidies are always required for the urban public transport.

The legal and administrative framework is very complex and there is no real framework forPPP projects. A lot of standardisation is necessary.

Construction difficulties are very common. Therefore, it is necessary to obtain a consensus,which requires time and clear communication.

3.2.11 Mr Weber, representative of the VDV-Association of German transport

Concerning the quality of public transport, the framework is very important, as well as theinternalisation of external costs and the availability of tools for sustainable transportplanning. Concerning users' rights, Mr Weber believes that these should not be regulated atthe EU level and prefers a voluntary approach.


15


4. SECOND SESSION: INTERMODALITYIN URBAN AREAS, SAFETY ANDSECURITY


4.1.1 Presentation on intermodality, interchangeand Park and Ride in Madrid by Mr. JavierAldecoa, Consorcio de Transportes deMadrid

The slides of Mr Aldecoa's presentation are attached in appendix of the present document.Mr Aldecoa highlights the following issues:

� Introduction:

– The metropolitan area of Madrid is growing. Mobility has evolved: there are radialways and transversal ways. Different concentric rings have been created to reducetrips duration and to resolve mobility problems.

– Intermodality has been developed in order to provide a good interchange betweenbus and rail services.

� Objectives about intermodality

– Creation of different rings of interchanges all around Madrid city for reducing thetime of the journey.

– Looking for efficiency of public transport.

– Increase the quality standards of intermodality.

– Real time information.

– Real sense of security

– Effectiveness in the management of interchanges

� Intermodality plans from 1986 to 2013

– 1986 – 2000 Implementation of intermodality (administrative, fare andinfrastructural integration)

– 2004 – 2007 First ring of urban interchanges plan construction (inside Madrid city)

– 2007 – 2011 Second ring of regional interchanges plan construction (metropolitanarea)

– 2007 – 2011 Park & Ride plan construction (50,000 parking places)

– 2009 – 2013 Bus lanes plan construction (under principal highways).

� The objective of the urban interchanges plan for 2004 – 2007 was to complete theconstruction of the first urban ring of interchanges. The private sector is making aninvestment of EUR 300 million to build the 4 new interchanges, with a capacity of1 million passengers per day.


16


� Problems about the construction and management

– The land is always occupied by other infrastructures, urban services,…

– Private holders operate under an economic cost-benefit scheme, public authoritieslook for public transport quality as a whole; which means that control tools.

– Very short political periods (4 years) for thinking, planning, building up andinaugurate.

– Long period for maintenance (35 years).

� The objective of the regional interchanges 2007- 2011 plan is the construction of theinterchanges of the second ring. Problems about the regional interchanges are:

– The use and property of the land.

– Privately financed. Not all of them are profitable.

– Lower demand than Madrid city Interchanges.

– Very short political periods (4 years) to persuade the town council for thinking,planning, obtaining the land and building up.

– Long period for maintenance (35 years).

� The 2007-2011 Park & Ride plan concerns developments on the third ring. Theproblems are the following:

– The benefit is for Madrid city. The property of the land is of other municipality.Who does pay?

– Privately financed. All of them are unprofitable.

– Huge land surface required in very good accessibility point in a really congestedmetropolitan area or very expensive infrastructure if we choose to create a park-building.

– The maintenance P&R is very expensive related with the low income.

� Problems about the bus lanes construction in 2009 – 2013 are:

– The highways belong to the Central government and to Madrid municipality. Thepublic transport belongs to the Regional Government. The land belongs to the localgovernments.

– A complete agreement between Public Administrations is necessary.

– Lack of space for additional lanes in consolidated central town (Madrid).

– Very expensive joints solutions.

4.1.2 Presentation on road safety: local trends,organisation, enforcement, practicalactions by Mrs Maria Wass-Danielsen, Cityof Copenhagen, member of the Eurocitiesworking group on road safety

The slides of Mrs Wass-Danielsen's presentation are attached in appendix of the presentdocument. Mrs Wass-Danielsen highlights the following issues.


17


� Suggestions for the European Commission:

– Harmonizing data collection techniques

– Annual European Road Safety Conference

– Closer cooperation with car industry

– Establishment of funding stream

– Closer cooperation between EC and networks such as EUROCITIES

� The municipality's dream for the City of Copenhagen:

– a unique European metropolis with a flourishing city life

– a city where the number of cyclists is increasing and where every opportunity isaccessible to everyone

An important precondition is to have a feeling of safety and security for citizens intraffic.

� Safety trends and developments in Copenhagen: in 1998, 569 people were killed orseriously injured in traffic accidents. In 2005, this figure was more than halved, to 242people. This by far exceeded the 2012 goal set in the city's traffic 2001 plan. Theseremarkable results were achieved:

– By close cooperation between national and local authorities:

. At the national level (National Safety Plan, campaigns, changes to the law,especially the introduction of a penalty point system and restrictions for drunkdriving)

. Local level (action taken by police, in connection with both drunk driving andspeeding)

– By influencing road user behaviour through traffic safety campaigns, especially inthe area of drunk driving and speeding. The press also played an important role.

– By targeting rebuilding projects: crossroads rebuilding projects in 2002-2004 werea big factor in 50% fewer deaths and serious injuries

� A new Traffic Safety Plan has been implemented, with a 2012 target of 40% reductionin the number of killed and seriously injured people. It focuses on the following areas:

– Accidents involving cyclists (previously, casualties had only slightly decreased)

– Accidents to pedestrians (which represent 25% of the total)

– Accidents at crossroads (remodelling junctions with high accidents frequency hasproved to be one of the most effective measures)

– Accidents involving young, high-risk, male motorists (which are overrepresented inthe statistics)

– Innovation (getting in a dialog with drivers about safety)

� Traffic safety situation worldwide: in 2004, road crashes were the second highest causeof death among people aged 5-29 (WHO). 1 million people die and more than 50million are annually injured in road accidents.

� Traffic safety situation in EU: Start of the decade: 50.000 killed in road accidents. Thisis unacceptable! The number of accidents varies a lot between Member States.


18


� The City of Copenhagen's expectations from the EU:

– Harmonizing data collection techniques: it is currently difficult to compare accidentdata between Member States because of different methods and criteria

– Exchange experience in an Annual European Road Safety Conference. There is aneed to exchange experiences between countries, to improve legislation,engineering and education. A lot can be learned from successful cities, which canact as mentors for others.

– Closer cooperation with car industry: the analysis of accidents between trucks andcyclists shows that the EU must tighten rules to optimize drivers’ view e.g. externalmirrors

– Establishment of funding stream, to create programmes to promote road safety atthe EU level. Closer cooperation between EC and city networks such as Eurocitiesmust be developed.

– Clearer and detailed goal. Focus on pedestrians and cyclists

4.1.3 Presentation on traveller security and anti-terrorism security in urban public transportby Mrs Andrea Soehnchen, InternationalAssociation of Public Transport (UITP)

The slides of Mrs Soehnchen's presentation are attached in appendix of the presentdocument. Mrs Soehnchen highlights the following issues:

� Introduction: security in public transport is a biased area:

– Perceived security in public transport is the key problem. However, a lot hasalready been done in this area. A door to door approach is required, involvingpublic transport and walk, in order to bring the necessary improvements.

– Problems related to terrorist acts and vandalism leave unprepared operatorsinsecure and helpless.

� Public transport systems are vulnerable:

– Open and accessible

– High number of passengers (a passengers full screening system would slow downflows to unacceptable levels)

– Indispensable for a city’s functioning

– Mobility is a key element of modern lifestyle

� Involvement of PT stakeholders

– Reason: responsibility for passengers, staff, systems

– Role as partner of:

. Governments (The problem of combating terrorism is not the problem ofpublic transport operators which provide transport services. However, publictransport operators agree to invest in CCTV cameras, etc. i.e. tasks devoted tothe police, and finally the end-user pays for this)


19


. Industry (there is no specific technology for public transport control: theexisting technology is too slow and not reliable enough)

. First responders (the system cannot be closed in case of alert. The eventscannot be avoided, but the operators could be more prepared and the severityof actions could possibly be reduced)

. General public and Media (the general public must be aware of risks and itscooperation is needed. This depends on the cultural backgrounds and differsfrom country to country) - (descriptions of terrorist acts by the media have avery negative effect on public transport. Relations with the media are notcontrolled)

� Scope of security strategies

– Addressing all phases of incident management

. Prevention (limited by the fact that the system cannot be closed in case ofsuspicion of action. The operators have to be prepared to terrorist acts, butmany operators do not feel concerned)

. Preparedness / Response

. Recovery

– Involving all relevant approaches

. Design of infrastructure, rolling stock and equipment (contradictions exist)

. Human factors

. Surveillance and detection technology

. Management and cooperation

� Challenges

– Think about the problem in quiet times! (Could the EC bring support to face basicreflexions?)

– Build partnerships and resilience teams!

– Share knowledge to learn from existing experience!

– Educate, train and practice! (there is a need to reduce the gap among the mostadvanced and the less advanced operators)


4.2.1 Mr Repussard, DG TREN

� The number of fatalities of road accidents has decreased from 50 000 to 38 000presently, of which 13 000 in the urban areas of the EU.

� Modal transfer can generate conflicts and not necessarily improves safety.

� At the EU level, there is a "shared responsibility" which is different from subsidiarity.


20


� The main concerns are for:

– Powered two-wheelers

– Pedestrians

– Young drivers.

� Three axes must be considered, including for public transport:

– Vehicles

– Behaviour

– Infrastructure.

� The existing CARE data base on road accidents is constituted from the police reportsmade in a harmonised way. There is still room for improvement, and the EC is workingon it, but it can take five years before the police agrees on it. The EC will publish thebest practice on data collection.

� There is a project at the pilot stage, considering in-depth data collection on samples ofaccidents, looking in particular into the cause of accidents and involving more than 500criteria, instead of 40 in the present police reports.

� Concerning trucks mirrors, new truck models are equipped with improved mirrors since2006. The provision for retrofitting of existing trucks should be implemented in 2008.

� A European road safety forum will be held on April 27 in Brussels. It will focus onyoung users and will give the floor to young users associations, in order to identify theirneeds and requests.

4.2.2 Mr. Tomassini, representative of theCURACAO project

It is possible that the requirements for car safety are in conflict with car emissions and fuelefficiency for which the EC is currently in confrontation with the car industry.

4.2.3 Ms Moutal, EC DG Information Society andMedia

There is a cooperation with the car industry, for example for the e-safety initiative launchedby the EC, which concerns the problems of infrastructures and vehicles. It involvescomplementary actions and deals on how to better integrate cars in the city.

4.2.4 Mr. Laconte, representative of the EEA

A report on transport was published on February 28 by the EEA. It stresses the link betweenthe extension of infrastructures and the increase of emissions. The external costs of roadtransport are not supported by those who generate them. Considering the direct EU subsidyof €140 billion per year in addition to local and regional subsidies, the target of reducingtraffic by 1% can only be achieved through a better use of intermodality, public transportand ITS.


21


4.2.5 Mr. Reiter, representative of FGM-AMOR

The introduction and enforcement of a 30 km/h speed limit has encountered good results inthe city of Graz, which is an example to be followed by other cities in order to reduce thenumber of accidents.

4.2.6 Mr. Billiet, representative of IRU

Road safety is high on the industry's agenda. The results of a study on the causes of truckaccidents will be made public in two to three months. It will bring a much wider perspectivethan the sole issue of dead angle.

4.2.7 Representative of the UNIFE

� The personal security feeling depends on the presence of public transport personnel, butthere are pressures to reduce public transport costs.

� Video cameras cannot prevent terrorism, they can only track it afterwards.

� The public transport system needs acceptance: in terms of crash worthiness, nobodyhesitates to use private cars even if public transport is safer than private cars by a 700factor.

4.2.8 Mr. Cicatiello, representative of CEEP

In relation with buslanes, even in the biggest capitals the only way to improve publictransport is to increase its commercial speed and provide sure time of transport.

One of the goals of the Green Paper is to leave the road to public transport and to treatbuslanes as the underground system:

� with the help of ITS;

� as far as funding is concerned: an increase of 20% of the commercial speed will enablea better use of the rolling stock without investment.

4.2.9 Mr. Hyatt, representative of theTransportation Working Group ZöldFiatalok

� "Road Peace" is a UK organisation, acting like in Copenhagen and using daily basedstatistics which are less shocking.

� "Accident" is sometimes a neutral term, which forgets the speed and volume associated.The term "catastrophe" would sometimes be more appropriate.


22


5. THIRD SESSION: INTELLIGENTTRANSPORT SYSTEMS


5.1.1 Presentation on the role of ITS in provisionof safe and sustainable urban transport byMr. Ken Laughlin, Hampshire CountyCouncil

The slides of Mr Laughlin's presentation are attached in appendix of the present document.Mr Laughlin highlights the following issues:

� Policy Background

– Increasing traffic levels, congestion, emissions, casualties have required a reviewof transport policies

– Interaction with other policies e.g. economy, planning, social, etc.

– ITS increasingly featuring in European, National, Regional and Local Policies

– ITS already has a role to play in delivering transport policy objectives

– but there are challenges to extract the best from the potential that ITS can offer

� What are the mobility challenges for 2020?

– Overarching Local Transport Plan policies and objectives:

. reduce the effect & impact of congestion

. promote safety / security

. increase accessibility

. improve air quality

. support wider quality of life issues (social exclusion)

. encourage value for money and efficient asset management

. widen travel choice

. ensure sustainability

. ensure economic vitality

– Increasing emphasis on the integration of different tools to deliver new andenhanced services and facilities, e.g

. demand responsive transport

. co-modality

. freight delivery


23


. personalised & mobile travel services

. road user/congestion charging

. network management / reliability

. measurement and monitoring

. cooperative vehicle / highway systems

. integrated ticketing

. reducing emissions

– Challenges / Barriers / Opportunities?

. Political

. Technological

. Organisational

. Financial

. Jurisdictional

� Core Transport Long Term Strategy / Philosophy: "Reduce", "Manage", "Invest".--> Recognition that transport problems can often be tackled by non transport means.--> Holistic approach.

– Reduce the number of journeys made, and the average length of journeys wherethere is no impact on quality of life or the economy

. Land use policies

. Travel planning and other initiatives

. Marketing behavioural change

. Discourage unnecessary journeys through demand management

– Manage the existing transport networks effectively to make best use of existingcapacity

. Minimise delays and improve journey time reliability

. Traffic management, inc ITS

. Junction improvements and local bypasses

. Continued commitment to road safety and casualty reduction

. Improved information to the travelling public and businesses about traveloptions

– Invest in additional capacity, where shown to be essential, with emphasis toinvesting in public transport networks, particularly those catering for shorterjourneys

. Improved public transport as alternative to car, especially for shorter journeys

. Measures to promote public transport links to the main transport hubs

. Improved walking and cycling facilities

. Improvements to ferry services and their interchanges


24


. Road improvements to create more capacity.

� ITS within an integrated transport strategy

– ITS should not be seen:

. in isolation

. as technology driven

– ITS can:

. provide the flexibility in delivering policies, objectives and services

. be used to complement or enhance traditional transport facilities

. manage demand and make the best use of the existing assets and infrastructure

. provide a cost effective solution compared to road building or majorinfrastructure provision

– ITS can deliver innovative solutions & the integration of different tools to delivernew and enhanced services and facilities, e.g

. demand responsive transport

. co-modality

. freight delivery

. personalised & mobile travel services

. road user/congestion charging

. network management / reliability

. measurement and monitoring

. cooperative vehicle / highway systems

. integrated ticketing

. reducing emissions.

– But to be effective, ITS needs to take account of:

. Policy objectives

. User needs

. Stakeholders

. --> Requirements definition

. --> Systems architecture.

� EU Urban Transport Policy (elements for the Green Paper)

– Cities & regions have a role to play in defining an EU transport policy

– There should be greater integration with other policy areas

– EU transport policy should be developed within a broad framework basis

– Policy should not be regulatory

– Policy should support Cities/Regions in developing/implementing new transporttools by removing barriers and/or developing EU wide enabling framework


25


– Policy should consider modal shift as one of its main objectives

� Role of ITS in Urban Transport Policy

– ITS deployment could be facilitated by:

. Standards (harmonization)

. Interoperability (key for plug & play technology)

. New technological solutions

– Policy should:

. encourage exploitation of ITS in traditional & non traditional areas

. promote innovation (policy & technological) to:

. improve mobility / accessibility / air quality / safety

. support EU industry

. improve coordination.

� Specific ITS actions at the EU level:

– Embed ITS as a core element of EU urban transport policy

– Comprehensive inventory of ITS applications for towns & cities

– Build on the existing developments & innovation

– Good practice guide for developing a cohesive ITS deployment plan covering:

. Needs of the city

. Interoperability

. Identification of the legal, organisational, financial, and jurisdictional issues

. Identification & engagement with stakeholders – partnership working

. Implementation of deployment plans

. Evaluation of results – identification of benefits

– Creation of a framework for the collection / dissemination of best practice

– Proactive demonstration programme with cities involvement

� Summary & conclusions

– ITS has significant role to play in safe & sustainable urban transport

– Impacts on other policy areas

– Can help deliver new, innovative & cost effective solutions

– Increasing role in urban and rural areas

– Part of access to wider services

– Urban/inter-urban network

– Regional/sub-regional

– Need to Address:

. Integration of Services / Information

. Joint agency working


26


. Communications

. Standards & interoperability

– Institutional, legal & financial issues can be overcome

– Flexibility to give local authorities the tools to apply the best strategy

– ITS should not be seen in isolation - must be a core element of a EuropeanIntegrated Transport Policy.

5.1.2 Presentation on a policy driven approachto intelligent urban transport systems byMrs Christelle Godinho, Mobility Agency ofthe City of Paris

The slides of Mrs Godinho's presentation are attached in appendix of the present document.Mrs Godinho highlights the following issues:

� Description of the problems and challenges:

– A public health and sustainable development challenge: Transport causes 70% ofNitrogen Oxide emissions, 40% of Volatile Organic Compounds, 40% ofsuspended particles (PM10)

– A social and socially-oriented challenge to improve mobility for everyone

– An urban challenge to make more attractive and better share public space: In Paris,road space is unequally shared: cars and two-wheeled motorised vehicles(circulating and parking) occupy 93% of the road surface, though accounting for61% of surface mechanised journeys

– An economic challenge to promote Paris’s economic health and that of theagglomeration

– A regional challenge: to build regional solidarity.

. The borough of Paris represents: 50% of the Francilian population, 60% of theRegion’s jobs, 90% of journeys by public transport.

. A constant mobility pattern since 1976: 3.5 trips / person

. Public transport takes care of almost 60% of Paris-Paris and Paris-suburbsjourneys. The car represents 81% of suburbs to suburbs journeys

– The Paris transport plan (PDP) is the transcription, on the Parisian territory and bythe city council, of the regional transport plan. A project was adopted by the citycouncil in February 2007.

� The main policies adopted or to be adopted

– Develop alternatives to individual motorised journeys

. Institutional framework and transport networks:

. The State, Region and “départements” finance heavy investmentundertakings (trains, undergrounds, tramways, motorways and the mainroad network).


27


. The City councils undertake the lay-out and maintenance of all otherpublic spaces. The Region and “départements” take part in the financingof environmentally- friendly alternatives and roadways.

. In Paris, the national Police Force is in charge of the control andenforcement of traffic and parking

. STIF: the public transport authority within the Ile-de-France region. The STIFmissions: define transport supply, finance the development of networks,promote public transport services. It approves contracts with operationcompanies and controls their activity.

. The objectives:

. A rising part of public transport, taxis, bicycle and pedestrian from 75% in2001 to 80% of journeys concerning Paris in 2013, and reaching 83% ofindividual journeys in 2020

. Between 2001 and 2013, a 20% increase in journeys within the publictransport, a 30 % increase between 2001 and 2020

. An increase of bicycle journeys of 400 % is forecast between 2001 and2020

. Create new underground lines as bypasses

. Create new tramways and dedicated bus lanes

– Reduce motorised traffic on Parisian roadways.

. The objectives:

. A decrease of 40% in network traffic by 2020 compared to 2001. Adecrease in traffic of 18% against 2001 has been measured in 2007

. This 40% decrease includes an increase in goods movements and servicesof 11%

. To stabilise the development of two-wheeled motorised vehicles

. Creation of Green areas.

– Place pedestrians and cyclists at the heart of the public area

. develop the cycling network : 500 km in 2010

. develop zones 30 km/h, green zones and network, pedestrian-exclusiveroadways, reverse-direction bicycle lanes

– Develop initiatives in favour of residential parking

. Metered parking

. Priority for residential parking

� Measures implemented or to be implemented with an ITS dimension

– Facilitate professional journeys

. Information system on delivery conditions

. Other modes like delivery tricycle for final deliveries

. Encourage less polluting vehicles and reduce more polluting


28


– Reduce dependency on the car and encourage alternatives for journeys home towork

. Increase the number of park & ride facilities

. Improve public transport operation: traffic light priority

. Video surveillance of buslanes

– Increase use of bicycles

. Self service bicycles: 1000 points available on July 2007 with 14 100 bicycles;an objective of 1451 points at the end of 2007 with 20 600 bicycles.

– Create or extend new reduced traffic sectors or roads

. New access control cameras on main roads

– Reinforce road safety

. Traffic lights management system considered for reducing speed at night

– Adapt the use made of the main ring road

. Regulating maximum speed allowed in real time

. Regulating Heavy Goods Vehicle traffic according to their size, extent ofpollution and their destination

. Implementing new ways of working and priority for taxis, emergency servicevehicles, vehicles for car pooling, the less polluting vehicles, express bus lines.

5.1.3 Presentation on how to practicallyimplement and manage intelligent urbantransport systems by Mr. Alexio Picco, AMI,Genoa

The slides of Mr Picco's presentation are attached in appendix of the present document. MrPicco highlights the following issues:

� The city of Genoa faces the same overall problems (congestion, pollution,...) as othercities with a big problem in the lack of space

� Integrated Urban Mobility Policies and ITS

– Parking management: by AMI, Azienda Mobilità e Infrastrutture di Genova.

– Integrated access restrictions and pricing (after trials, will be implemented in thefuture with a strong ITS dimension)

– Public transport (ITS for bus fleet management, bus lanes control enforcement,etc.)

– Intermediate flexible services (collective taxis, car pooling, etc.)

– Distribution of goods (control access to limit pollution, etc.)

– Infomobility (variable-message signs, websites, etc.)

– Safety, security (road monitoring centre, cameras on buses)


29


� Obstacles/barriers in ITS implementation

– Change resistance

– Development of a comprehensive evaluation plan (impacts and processes)

– Many actors involved in the implementation plan

– Integration between different systems

– Lack of strategic overview and lack of coordination

– Difficult estimation of all related costs

– Each system is a “customised solution”

� Recommendations for other cities

– ITS means innovative systems and services; they need political support

– Support EU and national R&D projects

– Use projects as start up for systems and services that should be economicallysustainable

– Develop a coherent business plan (implementation and management)

– Create integration with IT systems of other policy areas (i.e. environment)

– Develop ITS in an “user friendly” way

– Create partnerships

– Involve stakeholders

� Recommendations for ITS actions at EU level

– Define main criteria for interoperability of systems and services

– Support the development and the use of standards

– Develop ITS in new areas (walking, cycling, goods, ..)

– Support of large ITS demonstration “policy driven” projects with stronginvolvement of the cities at political and technical level (integrated approach, alsooutside mobility, ITS focused, digital sites, ...)

– Support take-up actions from “advanced” cities to “learning cities” (i.e. Genoa –Krakow)

� One suggested area for ITS actions at EU level: -20% traffic means –2 car trips perweek/ need of personalised, intermediate, flexible, “on demand” services (-->Agencyfor flexible services)

5.1.4 Presentation on electronic ticketing forensuring interoperability and managingpublic transport services by Mr. JanosMonigl, Transman Consulting, Budapest

The slides of Mr Monigl's presentation are attached in appendix of the present document.Mr Monigl highlights the following issues:

� Elektra Hungaria is an electronic system to be created by different operators: BKV,MAV, Volán, and other transport operators. On top of it, there will be a managementand clearing centre.


30


� Basic Interoperability Requirements of ELEKTRA Hungaria: with contactless,reloadable cards:

– Interoperability by combining of part systems. (Declaration!)

– Unified fare media (chip cards) for different passenger groups.

– Unified card structure, contents and formats.

– Unified fare product type catalogue, open for local specific needs.

– Unified discount (concession) types for different traveler groups.

– Unified identification system for devices, services and travel links.

– Unified technical requirements for cards and communication.

– Compatible data collection, transfer and processing.

– Central key generation and management.

– Independency of sub-system applicants from system suppliers.

– Examples: Holland, Denmark, Norway; Germany

– Dilemma: uniformity vs. versatility.

� Different ways to create an interoperable national card system:

– Unified requirements with a core allowing interoperability (pre-definedrequirements)

– Use existing subsystems and unifying requirements (post-defined requirements)

– -->how to unify is the most difficult task

� Contribution of chip-card system to public transport management

– Demand (e-ticket is not sufficient to collect integrated travel data)

– Supply/ costs (Elektra can create different fare systems)

– Revenues (and fare allocation among the companies)

� Managing local, regional and long distance interurban travels in ELEKTRA Hungaria(in Hungary, the responsibility for public transport is from the central government forrail and interurban buses and from the local governments for urban transport).

� Managing different fare systems on the cards: mobile phone, Internet, special revenuechannels are not directly part of Elektra.

� Transport purse: different fare product types can be placed on the card.

� Conclusions:

– E-ticketing is not only a tool for collecting revenue, but also a data collectionmeans for the operators and the users.

– The implementation of e-ticketing is only possible with strong political will and thecommitment of operators.


31



5.2.1 Ms Moutal, EC DG Information Society andMedia

The presentations over ITS are always related to demand; what is missing is the cardimension. As cars cannot be banned from cities, they have to be taken into account. Eco-driving and collaborative driving are important issues on which the EC is working and onwhich a feedback is necessary.

ITS is a technical tool. User awareness should not be forgotten and in particular peopleshould be made aware that ITS systems are available.

5.2.2 Mr. Laughlin, representative of HampshireCounty Council

ITS is like an iceberg: a lot of things are hidden behind the system. It is difficult to sell ITSto the politicians as its visible part is small.

5.2.3 Mrs Wass-Danielsen, representative of theCity of Copenhagen

Mrs Wass-Danielsen mentions the concept of "flexible roads": the function of a road canvary along the time, with the use of ITS.

5.2.4 Mr. Maes, DG TREN

ITS could be a way for public transport operators to earn revenue: there is an increasingdemand for more reliable traffic information and public transport operators can get a lot ofinteresting data such as bus tracking, delays, congestion. Navigation systems use static data.Demand will increase for dynamic information on congestion, etc. Private service providerswill be interested to get this information from public transport operators, which could sell itto them.

5.2.5 Mr. Birsul, representative of Siemens

Acceptance of public transport is linked to the information that passengers get. During thenight, proper information should be available from the bus drivers concerning traffic means,connections.


32


5.2.6 Mr Jakič, representative of the city ofLjubljana

Some examples show that ITS is necessary to plan the future.

Speed of public transport is only 18 km/h and 10 km/h during rush hours. Traffic fleetmanagement has to interface with traffic lights. Passengers are reluctant to buy threedifferent tickets, they only want one integrated ticket. Passengers prefer to send an SMS toknow when the next bus is coming and meanwhile continue doing other activities.Passengers want to have Wi-Fi connections in the bus stations.

5.2.7 Mr. Tomassini, representative of theCURACAO project

The investments of the municipalities in infrastructure have to be preserved in time. Theresponsibility of the infrastructure in cities should remain with the Mayor and should neverbe privatised.


In the Campania region, a single ticket is used for the different public transport modes andcompanies, with good results. ITS can help to increase the public transport commercialspeed which is for example of 12 km/h in Naples. Shop owners do not want to close citycentres to cars as shopping is associated with car. ITS is a valid tool, but different obstacleshave to be overcome.

5.2.9 Mr. Gregor Resman representative ofTelargo

Data from ITS for bus operators and good planning of buses on the road contribute toreduce operation costs and pollution.


33


6. FOURTH SESSION: ENVIRONMENTALPERFORMANCE AND NOISE


6.1.1 Presentation on sustainable and liveablecities - a vision by Mr Tamás Fleischer,Hungarian Academy of Sciences

The slides of Mr Fleischer's presentation are attached in appendix of the present document.Mr Fleischer highlights the following issues:

� To get to sustainable and liveable cities, we have learned:

– Not enough to focus exclusively on emission issues

. Transport accounts for a quarter of global CO2 emissions

. Transport is the only industrial sector where emissions are still growing –nearly doubled in last 15 years (CEE doubled)

. All this happened when technological innovations achieved good results inmotor, fuel, vehicle etc. but traffic growth over-compensates all theseimprovements.

. First statement: if we focus too much extent to emission mitigation, we can’tachieve even this direct target, not speaking about further problems.

. Second statement: even if we invented a (not-possible)0-emission, 0-consumption, 0-cost car, the urban transportation crisiswouldn’t be smaller but bigger

. Space is as much an emissions problem as other pollutions.

– Not enough using technology but in hardware development of the transport

. Traditionally new technologies were used in transport to improve differenthardware tools: better roads, better vehicles, better fuel etc.

. Transport developers are always open to invent „faster, stronger, bigger” tools(tanker, airplane, motorway, TGV etc.), but slower in realising, if the directionhas to be changed because the transport begins to be blocked

. My statement: the new challenge is to use the new technology in betterorganisation and regulation of traffic, and promoting not more but lessmotorised traffic. I call that as using info-technology to improve the softwareof the transport rather than just bring hardware solutions.

– Not enough using information technology (IT) just to solve old problems

. New inventions frequently are used for a long time to solve old problems bythem, and it needs further innovations to realise how the new technology canchange the traditional sectorial solutions as well.


34


. Statement: the real involvement of IT into transport arrives, when genuine newtransport solutions are generated with the new technology.

– There are no definite, optimal, best solutions any more

. There is not any more a „ready” complete definite state of the future that couldbe the target of our plans.

. We do not even know to what situation we have to adjust our activity in a 10-20 etc. years perspective (when our constructions, infrastructures will alloperate).

. Statement: the only certain point is the existence of the change, and that oursystems have to be ready to adapt themselves to these changes.

– ‘Intelligent’ means: adaptive, demand-sensitive, able to learn (from the past andpresent, from others and from own experiences)

. When we speak on intelligent transport systems, a main issue must be theability of these systems to adjust themselves to the changing environment, tothe changing circumstances.

. Statement: a most general objective has to be the preparation of future systems(be they transport systems or cities or others) for a continuous adaptivechange: where they are able to be adapted to a new environment, and still ableto reserve their own functions.

Key elements to build a new context:

� Integrations (within and around transport issues)

– If we look at our Background paper p.4. ‘Intelligent transport systems’, ‘Issues’; -we find almost all suggested tools and policies as being different kind ofintegrations.

– modal integration (or co-modality), spatial integration (or urban/interurbaninterface, cross-border issues) [I would add regional transport alliances], technicalintegration (or interoperability), information integration (or satellite based andtravel information), resource integration (or PPP-s)

– I would add: better embedding of transport: policy integration (transport withurban policy, with regional policy etc.), social integration: social embedding ofdecision processes, enforcing user’s interests, evaluation integration: involvementof evaluations into development processes

– How can we operationise these integrations in urban area

. integration vs. dominant transport modes,

. the role of public space.

– Integration vs. modal domination: The new technology time-to-time created a newdominant transport mode:

. Pre-industrial period: the construction of canals

. Industrial period: the victory of rails

. Modernity period: the dominance of cars.

. Post-modernity period: „everything goes”


35


. There is no dominant transport mode

. Integrations, co-operations, alliances

. This is an important basis of the vision.

– Integrations - the role of public space

. Metaphor of Lewis Mumford (The City in History): The city is Shelter,Fortress and Temple (physical, social and spiritual protection)

. If we see the public space rather than the houses, the city is first of all a placeof exchanges: Market, Forum, Promenade; (exchange of goods, exchange ofideas and ‘exchange’ /meeting point/ of people)

. Such kind of meeting point functions of the city are to be served in a liveableurban area through an integrated approach

. The more roads you build, the more car traffic you attract. Similarly: the morepublic space you build, the more pedestrians you can attract

� Sustainability

– First statement: sustainability is a temporal and a spatial issue in the same time.

– Second statement: environmental, social and economic issues are not of equalimportance within sustainable approach, but the latter two are subordinated to theenvironmental constraints.

– Third statement: there are external conditions of sustainability (touches theresource use and the pollutions) and there are also internal conditions: a system hasto be able to react on feedbacks arriving from the environment and change itsoperation by those signals.

– On sustainability approach:

. UN Bruntland report (Our Common Future 1987) definition: „development,that meet the needs of the current generation without compromising the abilityof future generations to meet their own needs ”

. Inter-generational solidarity

. Spatial extension – intra-generational solidarity / defence development, thatmeet the needs of those living here without compromising the ability of thoseliving elsewhere to meet their own needs.

. Weak sustainability: the sum of the (environmental, social, economical) capitalshould not be decreased

. Strong sustainability: the environmental constraints are to be respected inthemselves

. External conditions of sustainability: (1) the input should not extend the rate ofregeneration of sources; (2) the output should not extend the absorptioncapacity of nature; (+ the use of non-renewables running out by the rate oftheir substitutability with renewables). (Herman Daly)

. Internal (system-operational) conditions of sustainability: the system has to besensitive on external conditions, its operation should respect that constraint,and there should exist self-regulating internal subsystems for that kind ofoperation.


36


. The fulfilment of the internal conditions of sustainability demand new type oftransport / urban expertise

� Complexity

– What the theory of complex interacting systems can tell us about the [sustainable]urban fabric.

– Salingaros, Nikos A (2000) Complexity and Urban Coherence. Journal of UrbanDesign, Vol. 5. pp.291-316

– City is a network of topologically deformable paths. A coherent city must be „ableto follow bending, extension, and compression of paths without tearing. In order todo this, the urban fabric must be strongly connected to the smallest scale, andloosely connected on the largest scale.”

– Eight rules of Salingaros for assembling components of a city into a coherentwhole

. (1) Strongly coupled elements of the same scale form a module

. (2) Similar elements do not couple. A critical diversity of different elements isneeded.

. (3) Modules couple with their boundary elements, not with internal elements

. (4) Interactions are strongest on the smallest scale and weak on the largestscale

. (5) Long-range forces create the large scale from well-defined structure of thesmallest scales.

. (6) System’s components assemble progressively from small to large

. (7) Elements and modules on different scales do not depend on each other in asymmetric manner: a higher scale requires all lower scales but not vice versa.

. (8) A coherent system cannot be completely decomposed into constituent parts.

As a conclusion on sustainable and liveable cities – a vision:

� We have learned:

– Not enough to focus on emission issues, listen to space pollution!

– Use new technology for software development too!

– Instead of solving old problems use IT to reformulate problems

– Instead of definite solutions look for adaptability and flexibility

– Intelligent systems can learn, and adapt their operation to needs

� Three key elements to build a new context

– Integrations – within the transport there is no more dominant mode; transport as awhole is embedded into wider policies and urban public space approach.

– Sustainability – the space of places needs protection against the space of flows(Manuel Castells)

– Complexity – by the geometry and modular structure of a coherent city: the basisis the strongly coupled local fabric.


37


6.1.2 Presentation on air pollution from transportin cities: problems and solutions by MrsNina Renshaw, Transport and Environment(T&E)

The slides of Mrs Renshaw's presentation are attached in appendix of the present document.Mrs Renshaw highlights the following issues:

Urban air quality – the problem

� Air quality and health

– Air pollution is the main cause of environment-related diseases in Europe

– Cardiovascular and respiratory problems

. 20 million Europeans a day suffer from respiratory problems (EEA 2005)

. Current air pollution concentrations = 370 000 premature deaths per year &> 100 000 serious hospital admissions

. Annual cost of health impacts (PM & Ozone) to society estimated between€276-€790 billion = 3-9% of the EU25 GDP

– Harmful air pollutants to be primarily addressed for health & environment:

. Particles (PM10, PM2.5) – dominate health impacts of air pollution

. Sulphur dioxide (SO2)

. Nitrogen oxides (NOx – NO2)

. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

. Ammonia (NH3)

. Ozone

� CALCULATED transport air emissions down (based on emissions modelling – fleetcomposition, diesel/petrol, age of vehicles, heavy / light vehicles, etc.), butMEASURED air pollution along roads constant (in urban areas measured levels of NO2and PM10 have remained constant – and above European air quality limits) (Source:EEA)

Explanation of differences:

– Increased proportion NO2/NOx

– Diesel cars fail on emissions in urban areas and models do not take that intoaccount

Solutions at EU level

� Air quality legislation - political developments

– Air quality limits currently under discussion

– Key issues:

. PM2.5 annual limit (character & values)

. PM10 daily limits (#days, and derogations)


38


. PM10 annual limit

– EP second reading (+ conciliation ?)

� Euro standards: not as effective as they seem (for NOx emissions of diesel passengercars, values from performance in urban traffic situations are over the euro standard testcycle values), and Euro 5/6 for cars still way off US levels (by 2015, Euro 6 standardwill be lagging way behind the US standards for NOx emissions).

� Coming up in 2007

– Euro VI standards for lorries

. Important source of urban air pollution

– Standards for ship engines and fuels?

. Need fuel quality directive and

. NOx standards for ships

– EU funds: Trans-European network vs. Public transport? (Added value is in thecities, in terms of population affected)

Solutions at national level: Some examples of national policies

� Incentives for particle filters for new cars, vans, buses and lorries and retrofitting (NL,DK, AT)

� Circulation taxes & infrastructure charging based on Euro emissions classes (DE)

� Differentiate seaport charges on basis of NOx emission of ship engine (SW)

Solutions at local / regional level

� Urban charging: two successes

– London

. 17 February 2003

. One third less cars

. More buses, metros, bikes, taxis

. 16% lower air emissions

. Business impact negligible

. Mayor re-elected

– Stockholm

. 3 January 2005

. 7 month trial, then referendum

. 20% less traffic

. Inner city emissions cut by 14%

. Much faster deliveries

� Low Emission Zones

– In place:

. Amsterdam


39


. Stockholm, Malmo, Gothenburg, Lund

. Lombardia

. Athens

– Planned:

. Munich (October 2007)

. London (February 2008)

. Berlin (2008)

. The Netherlands (allowed from April 2007)

. Denmark (allowed from July 2008).

� 80 km/h zones (NL) (reductions in emissions achieved)

� And of course:

– Local speed limits in urban areas and main roads (30km/h)

. Bristol, London, Berlin, Brussels, Rotterdam

– More & cleaner public transport:

. Bristol, Graz, Copenhagen, London, Milan, Munich, Stockholm, Riga, Rome,Vienna, Düsseldorf, Brussels.

. Green public procurement, retrofitting buses

– Promotion of cycling: win-win for health!

. Bristol, Graz, Copenhagen, London, Berlin, Brussels, Stockholm, Riga,Vienna, Warsaw

Conclusions

� Emission models are too optimistic – ‘cycle beating’ is not taken into account

� Many measures available at all levels

– Action at ALL LEVELS is indispensable

– Some Member States have started implementation.

6.1.3 Presentation on noise from transport incities: problems and solutions byMr Michael Jaecker-Cueppers, FederalEnvironmental Agency, Germany,representative of the CALM project

The slides of Mr Jaecker-Cueppers's presentation are attached in appendix of the presentdocument. Mr Jaecker-Cueppers highlights the following issues:

Noise Problems from Urban Transport: Impacts

� High impairments

– exposures up to 80/75 dB(A) daytime/night time


40


– compare WHO Guidelines for residential areas 55/45 dB(A)

– ∆L = 25 -30 dB(A) ≡ traffic volume reduction to 0.3 or 0.1 %

– noise effects:

. increase of heart attack risks (levels above 65/55)

. annoyance

– noise peculiarity: higher sensitivity during night time (sleep protection)⇒ no shift of traffic to night time period !

� Main source:

– road traffic:D: 70 % of the population with high daytime exposure (> 65 dB(A)) live alongmajor urban roads)

Noise Problems from Urban Transport: Responses

� Policy: noise of low priority (despite the view of the citizens; surveys D: similarconcern versus road traffic noise and air pollution)

� Insufficient EU and MS legislation:

– in general no noise reception limits for existing infrastructures

– EU emission regulations of low efficiency (see below)

– EU reception regulation (Environmental Noise Directive END of 2002):

. EU sets no compulsory limits

. concentration on hot spots

⇒ not much exposure reduction in Europe in the last decades; reductions for the „hotspots“ to be expected.

Solutions: Integrated Approach Needed

� High noise reductions needed:⇒ in general a mix of measures required⇒ integration of measures and instruments into an optimal (cost- effective) strategy

� Shared responsibility and competence of various stakeholders:

– EU, Member States MS, regional and local authorities RA, LA,

– transport infrastructure and service operators INF, OP

– manufacturers MAN

– citizens (CIT: as polluters and exposed) and NGOs

� Noise reduction among the targets of sustainable mobility(safety, reduction of air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, area and resourceconsumption, urban quality etc)⇒ common approach: minimising traffic.

Solutions: Ranking of Strategies in Urban Noise Protection

� Strategies:

– traffic avoidance

– shift to low noise emission sources

– reduction of the emissions


41


– measures in the sound propagation path

. increase of distances between source and receiver

. shielding (barriers etc)

. increase of sound absorption

. prevention of reflections

– measures at the receiver

. sound insulation (windows)

. orientation of rooms according to their sensitivity

. shielding through building parts.

Traffic Avoidance: Short Distance City

� aim: enabling „zero emission mobility“ by walking and cycling

� via urban land use planning(mixture of use, decentralisation, condensation) (LA, RA, legal framework: MS)

� via promotion of the „pedestrian and bicycle friendly town“ (LA, legal framework:MS):

– increasing safety (speed reduction of motorised traffic) and performance(privileged and spacious networks)

– combined transport systems (e. g. bike and ride with public transport).

Traffic Avoidance : Pricing Instruments

� Reflecting infrastructure and external costs of transport (LA, MS, EU);

� instruments:

– petroleum tax (mileage-related) (MS)

– motor vehicle tax (can be emission-related) (MS)

– road pricing (LA, e.g.. London congestion charge)

– lorry toll (mileage-related, (EU), MS; Germany, Switzerland)

– parking fees (LA)

– reduction of subsidies (EU, MS, LA)

Traffic Avoidance : Traffic Management

� parking guiding systems (LA)

� freight logistics (LA, OP)

� traffic restrictions (LA): e.g. pedestrian zones, lorry bans (night time)(no real traffic avoidance if total mileage is not reduced)

Traffic Avoidance: Change of Life Style

� promotion of a life style with low (motorised) travel intensity

– car free residential areas (LA)

– car sharing (LA)

– campaigns (LA, MS, EU)


42


Shift to Low Noise Emission Sources

� promotion of low noise versions within vehicle categories via incentives (betteroperational conditions, lower charges)(examples low noise trucks: Heidelberg, Austria) (LA, legal framework: MS, EU)

� modal shift :

– innerurban cars ⇒ public transport (very efficient: ⇒ subways)

– long (?)-distance road and air transport ⇒ rail, ship (freight)

� requires comparison of specific emissions or better: specific impairments of the modes(with respect to transport performance [Person-km, ton-km]):specific emissions from rail transport (freight, trams) can be higher than those from theanalogous road mode

� Instruments:

– land use planning (density, public transport lines as centres of urban development)(LA, RA)

– freight logistics (connections to rail network) (INF, OP)

– economic instruments (rail cards, job tickets)

– privileging public transport (bus lanes, priority at traffic lights) (LA)

– promotion of combined transport (MS)

– improving the service of public transport(OP, INF, LA; legal framework: MS, EU))(frequency, density of stops, punctuality)

– public relations, information (OP, LA)

Reduction of the Noise Emissions: Technical Measures

� Stakeholders: (MAN, OP, INF; legal framework: EU, MS ):

– to be addressed: vehicles and infrastructure (rolling noise)

– adaptation to the specific urban situations („city mode“ for vehicles)

� Instruments:

– noise emission regulations (vehicles and infrastructure) (EU, MS)(vehicles 1995; tyres: inefficient; trams: no regulation)

– incentives for low noise products and procedures

. exemptions from operational restrictions (trucks – see Heidelberg) (MS, LA)

. noise emission-related infrastructure charges (EU, MS, INF: airports)

– information on low noise products (eco labels) (EU, MS)

– public procurement of low noise vehicles (MS, LA)

– construction of low noise surfaces (INF, LA)

Reduction of the Emissions: Traffic Calming

� Low noise driving behaviour: (LA, CIT)

– speed limit reduction (Night time speed limit 30 km/h in Berlin on main road(Schildhornstraße))

– street design: enforcing low noise driving


43


– training, education and control of drivers (low noise driving ≡ fuel saving)(MS,LA, OP, police (control))

Conclusions

� Integration of noise reduction into a strategy for sustainable mobility required

� EU plays an important role in urban transport noise abatement, e. g. :

– regulations (noise emission and reception limits according to the state of art resp.noise effects)

– harmonisation of assessment methods and definitions (eco-labelling)

– legal framework for pricing instruments

– information (networks, good practice guidelines, campaigns)

– promoting mobility and noise related research (noise effects, technology, etc)


6.2.1 Mr Repussard, DG TREN

A wider view on air pollution in urban areas is needed, involving traffic, buildings andindustry. These three sources of pollution must be considered, their respective pollutionlevels must be measured and their progress should be evaluated.

6.2.2 Representative of the Szeged transportcompany

The speaker takes the opportunity to advocate for trolleybuses from an operational point ofview. Trolleybuses are extinct in the EU-15, whereas they still exist in the CEECs.

With the introduction of new gas buses on the market, what can be the role of the trolleybusand how does the trolleybus compare for noise and vibrations? It must be stated thattrolleybuses are better for the environment.

A bad tendency has been observed in the cities of Debrecen and Szeged in Hungary, wherenew buses have been introduced stating that these are better than the trolleybuses, with therisk that other cities want to exchange their trolleybuses with buses following these experiences.

The replacement of trolleybuses with buses has happened in Slovakia and in Romania.

It must be clearly stated to the politicians and to the public what are the levels of pollutionof trolleybuses, compared with the euro norms.


44


6.2.3 Representative of the European CyclistsFederation

Concerning health, transport has an impact on air pollution and noise. Health should also beconsidered in terms of physical activity. DG SANCO has funded projects to help peopleexercise more. This can be achieved by increasing walking and cycling.

Concerning EU funding of transport infrastructure, often projects aim at improving thesituation for cars but make it worse for cyclists and pedestrians. The impact of new projectson cycling and walking should also be considered.

6.2.4 Mrs Ollier, representative of UITP

Concerning trolleybuses, the UITP has created a new working group on trolleybuses for oneor two years. There are problems in the CEECs and in Russia, and the UITP can becontacted to exchange experiences. Certain Western Europe cities, like Rome, havereintroduced trolleybuses for environmental reasons, along with small electric buses in thehistorical zones closed to polluting vehicles.


Mr. Cicatiello pushes for the use of CNG buses, which are much less noisy and produce lessPM emissions than diesel buses, with a similar market cost.

Concerning trolleybuses Mr. Cicatiello considers that it is crazy to dismiss them where theyare still operated.

6.2.6 Mr. Laughlin, representative of HampshireCounty Council

Concerning the previous sessions and issues of traffic risks for PPPs and safety-security inpublic transport, it should be mentioned that security risks are paid by the private sector,which has to bear large security costs, like in London and Madrid.

6.2.7 Ms Soehnchen, representative of UITP

A study on security in public transport has been carried out by the UITP. Material isavailable and can be communicated.


45


7. CONCLUSIONS, SUMMING UP

Mr. Kazatsay (DG TREN) mentions that the workshop has shown how complex the subjectis: it concerns urban transport and several other actors, and involves technical elements,legislative elements which can be assigned to the EC, managerial issues, etc.

Concerning the human side of urban transport, safety, security and health have beenmentioned repeatedly.

On the financial part, urban transport managers have clashes with their ministry of finance.

It is clear that cities had to take steps to ease pressure from congestion. They did itindividually, so that the sharing of experience is the n°1 task. The EC can add value to this.

On the technicalities of ticketing, ITS, infrastructure development, we have to realise thatdifferent groups (bankers, NGOs, operators, etc.) are looking at these issues from differentangles. Their objectives are diverging, so it is difficult to draw conclusions.

Many contributions were provided by the participants to the workshop and are still expectedfrom the public through the Internet consultation which is open until April 30.

Mr Kazatsay thanks the speakers for their excellent preparation and for the informationprovided, the audience for the ideas and the problems which need to be known even if theyare not typical, the REC which provided the arrangements and the accommodation, and theinterpreters.


46


APPENDIX: PRESENTATION SLIDES

1

Regional EnvironmentalCenter

Preparation of the Green Paper on urban transportThird Technical Workshop

“Public transport, intermodalityand intelligent transport“

Marta Szigeti BonifertExecutive Director

www.rec.org

Bridging Stakeholders

• “… is a non-partisan, non-advocacy, not-for-profit international organisation with a mission toassist in solving environmental problems (…)”

• The REC is legally based on a charter signed by thegovernments of 29 countries and the European Commission

• Population served ~ 200 million

• 100% project based organization (over 300 running projects)• Multi-stakeholder International Board• 190 staff (some 30 nationalities)• 10 million Euro annual turnover

• 17 country offices & 2 field offices

www.rec.org

REC office network

www.rec.org

Beneficiaries

• Turkey

• Balkan Countries

• New EU members – Bulgaria and Romania

• EU countries – Czech Republic, Estonia,Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia andSlovenia

• Operation beyond CEE – EECCA, Asia, Africa,Latin-America

• transfer of experience, e.g.:• enforcement and compliance• strategic environmental assessment

www.rec.org

REC’s focuses

•Over 3500 projectssince 1990

• Environmental information• Environmental policy

• Environmental law• NGO support• Climate change

• Capacity building• Public participation• Sectoral integration• Environmental education

• Sustainable Transport• … REC Video – Click!

www.rec.org

The REC’s Sustainable TransportTopic Area

• Primarily focusing on new EU member states• Transfer of experiences• Partnerships• Current projects on:

• Public transport strategies• Congestion charging• Transport of dangerous goods• Promotional activities• Clean fuels• Support to EC initiatives• Selected references: ELTIS, CIVITAS, SPUTNIC,

CURACAO, DaGoT, MOBILIS, CATALYST REC Video – Click!

2

www.rec.org

Future priorities

• Promote and disseminate best practicesabout integrating environmental concernsinto transport policy and makingtransport more sustainable

• Assist public transport stakeholders in theregion to solve transport related problems

REC Video – Click!

Thank You for Your Attention!

M6 Motorway Project, Hungary, A case StudyIFSL PPP Seminar, Athens, 26th May, 2005

0 Managing Traffic Risk in PPP Projects

Managing Traffic Riskin PPP Projects

Béla Kilyénfalvi, ING

March 2007


Traffic Risk in PPP Projects

� Possible traffic risk bearing options� Full traffic risk – complete reliance on real tolls or fares paid by users

� Mix of real tolls / fares and direct subsidies from public sector

� Shadow toll / fare payments from public sector

� No net traffic risk – availability payments from public sector


What are the implications of Traffic Risk in PPPProjects?

� Procurement costs and timetable

� Value for Money

� Government budget

� Recovering user benefits

� Political considerations

� Diversion of traffic to competingroutes / modes

What is the best option?


Implications of traffic risk bearingProcurement

� Private sector bearing ANY nettraffic risk� lengthens procurement

� adds to tender costs

� Tenderers and financiers requirerobust traffic projections

� detailed analysis

� extensive surveys

� complex modelling


Implications of traffic risk bearingValue for money

� Financiers particularly require� conservative projections

� higher returns and cover ratios

for bearing traffic risk

� Predictability is vital� especially in urban environment

� any element of tolls / fares involvesuncertainty over willingness to pay


Strengths and weaknesses of project optionsReal tolls / fares paid by users

� Favoured by EU (user pays)

� Minimal impact on Governmentbudget

� Full tolls / fares can causepolitical problems

� High diversion of traffic tocompeting routes / modes

� High private sector risk premium

� Lengthy procurement

M6 Motorway Project, Hungary, A case StudyIFSL PPP Seminar, Athens, 26th May, 2005


Strengths and weaknesses of project optionsMix of tolls / fares and subsidies

� User pays

� Tolls / Fares more affordable

� Subsidy for non-user benefits

� Low impact on public sectorbudget

� Politics still an issue

� Some diversion of traffic tocompeting routes / modes

� Private sector risk premium

� Lengthy procurement7 Managing Traffic Risk in PPP Projects

Strengths and weaknesses of project optionsShadow tolls / fares paid by public sector

� No issue of willingness to pay

� No diversion to competingroutes / modes

� Private sector still bearstraffic risk

� Greatest impact onGovernment budget

� User benefits not recovered

� Private sector risk premium (low)

� Lengthy procurement


Strengths and weaknesses of project optionsAvailability payments

� No issue of willingness topay

� No diversion to competingroutes / modes

� No private sector riskpremium

� Shortest procurement

� High impact on budget

� User benefits not recovered


Conclusion

� Private sector bearing traffic risk in PPP projects� lengthens procurement and adds to costs

� worsens value for money

� can result in diversion to competing routes / modes

BUT (if tolls / fares charged to users)� can minimise budget contribution

� enables user benefits to be captured


Conclusion

� Consider subsidies to cover non-user benefits

� Consider minimum revenue guarantees to reduce traffic risk

� Availability Payments target Governments aims for Project

� Artificial structures (shadow tolls, congestion charges)generally unattractive

1

Preparation of the Green Paper on urban transport:“Efficiency and effectiveness of urban public transport

authority perspective”

Budapest 7 March 2007

1

Among EMTA members experiences….

• www.emta.com

2

3

• EMTA association of European MetropolitanTransport Authorities brings together 30 publicauthorities of public transport networks in European largestcities.

• These authorities� Plan, co-ordinate, fund and improve the quality of

public transport systems� Serve more than 85 mio European citizens

� EMTA is a platform of exchange, carries out surveys andbenchmark performances

• In urban areas, public transport provides the mostefficient mobility solution regarding energyconsumption and scarce public space occupation

4

• Transport Authorities have been reinforced in therecent years• decentralisation of responsibilities to regional and

local level

• generalisation of contracting

• Transport authorities show a variety of context(legal frameworks, institutionnal organisations, sharedresponsibilities with political bodies and operators)

• They also show a variety of experiences aimed atincreasing efficiency and effectiveness of publictransport

5

Among EMTA members experiences….

• Analysis of costs in contracts (Stuttgart)• IT for integration (Helsinki)• Social inclusion (Paris region)• Tackling congestion (Stockholm)

6

Verband Region Stuttgart VRS

• Complying with the 4 criteria of Altmark-Transdecision

• The context� Stuttgart and the counties around are PTAs� The Stuttgart region is responsible for financing

bus services� In Stuttgart city , public owned SSB is operating

bus services� The present contracts started in 1994 and are

open-ended� Region and PTAs decided not to tender but to

comply with 4 criteria .

7

If the undertaking is not chosen in a public procurement the level of compensationneeded has to be determined on the basis of an analysis of the costs

• Objectives are� find out if the 38 operators are a typical well run

undertaking� make sure compensation does’nt exceed legal

level

• Analysis� Assess precisely the quantity of service delivered

in terms of departures, service kilometers, drivershour in service ….

� Assess all cost elements and per element theaverage cost per service–km

� Compare to typical costs (based on real marketprice or benchmarking)

8

• PTAs evaluate new level of provision

• Discussions take place with 38 operators� About level of provision if relevant� Preliminary costs have been determined,

negociation will take place if need of change

• New contracts will be issued� The compliance with other 3 criterias will be

ensured� New contracts to be issued spring 2007

9

E-ticketing - Helsinki

• Foreseen benefits of E-ticketing are clear� For Authorities:

– Opportunity to achieve mobility in cities

– modern approach and new services

– Seamless journeys multi modal and multi-networks

– Better control of revenues and subsidies

� For operators:– Gain new customers with new service

– Increase speed at boarding– Source of marketing datas for public transport management

� For customers:– Convenience and speed– Seamless journeys

– Possibly additional services

10

• Difficulties to overcome� Contactless is more than a technical project� Needs the agreement of all parties involved but

strategies might diverge� Need for funding� Need of a champion at highest level

11

YTV Helsinki- 2nd generation of contactless travel cards

• YTV present system…� In use since 2002, across 4 municipalities� Integrates bus, trams, metro commuter trains and

ferries� 1 mio passenger/day and 1 mio cards issued

• and the second generation by 2014� Life cycle ends, need to up-date and extend� New travel card + passenger real time information

system� Reloading Cards through internet, use of mobile

phone as tickets� Monitoring of the running costs� Collecting useful datas

12

STIF Paris-region - Social inclusion

• ALLOBUS- ROISSY is a 24/24 hours service to serve Paris-CDG Airport platform from 9 communities around with 4 bus lines on a demand responsive scheme

• mix between demand responsive transport and regular lines operated by minibuses

• Funding gathers the concerned municipalities and County (Département), Aéroport de Paris, bus operator and STIF

• Launched in 1999 , 2nd contract 2006• Increase ridership 200 000 users to 600 000• Positive results with regard to social inclusion

and safety• But expensive so partially mixed with fix lines

• Discussions to expand towards more municipalities

13

Effective social inclusion

• Night bus lines

� 40 lines, 2000 bus stops,

� 200 cities served across Paris Region� Through the night

� Increase in ridership� Main reason is working shift hours

� Quality and security appreciated

14

Stockholm Congestion tax trial: a major challenge for SL

• Congestion Tax trial lasted for 7 month endingJuly 2006

• Major challenge for SL Stockholm transportauthority� Increase of provision of 7% in a1 year delay� Extended tracks and more bus services, new

depots, more bike and ride facilities

• Continuous monitoring to collect data andknowledge before and after�Anticipation from the population :10 to 15%would

use more public transport in fact 6%-8% only did� Patronage increased by 6% (half of it on metro)

15

� Travellers behaviours, quality of service andsatisfacion monitored all along

o Level of satisfaction higher on bus than metroo Relief in traffic made bus more attractive

especially new direct routes

o Punctuality and spare time

� The role of the transport authority is crucial whentaking measures to tackle congestion

16

• European Metropolitan Transport Authoritiesdemonstrate their ability to constantly adapt to newsituations and to design new solutions taking advantage ofthe local context

• Nevertheless they call for actions from Europeancommission in the fields of• harmonisation of standards and data collection

• Better dissemination of good practices

• Definition of guidelines for a fair infrastructurecharge

• Implementation of legal framework makingpossible at local level to better coordinate land usepolicy and transport planning, in due respect ofsubsidiarity

17 18

New EMTA barometer June 2007

Contact: [email protected]

Szentendre, 7 March 2007. 1

02/05/200702/05/2007Preparation of the Green Paper Preparation of the Green Paper

Szentendre, Botond AbaSzentendre, Botond Aba 11

EfficiencyEfficiency andand effectivenesseffectivenessofof urbanurban publicpublic transporttransport

Operator Operator perspectiveperspective



EfficiencyEfficiency andand effectivenesseffectiveness ofofurbanurban publicpublic transporttransport

-- contentcontent --�� GlobalGlobal trend trend andand competitivenesscompetitiveness�� EfficiencyEfficiency -- asas aa targettarget ofof thethe investorinvestor ((andand

managementmanagement))�� ProfitabilityProfitability�� EffectivenessEffectiveness -- asas aa targettarget ofof passengerspassengers ((andand

thethe locallocal authorityauthority))�� ConclusionConclusion�� SubsidiaritySubsidiarity



172

780

590

735755

264220

169

70122

121 138

206

180156

60101

342159 9530 54

200

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Mill

ion

pcs

ofc

ars

Világ

Európa

Észak-Amerika

Ázsia

Latin-Amerika

FÁK

Afrika/Óceánia

CIS

172

780

590

735755

264220

169

70122

121 138

206

180156

60101

342159 9530 54

200

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Mill

ion

pcs

ofc

ars

Világ

Európa

Észak-Amerika

Ázsia

Latin-Amerika

FÁK

Afrika/Óceánia

CIS

GlobalGlobal trend trend ofof thethe motorisationmotorisation



EfficiencyEfficiency asas aa targettarget ofof investorinvestor((andand managementmanagement))

�� DependsDepends onon thethe typetype ofof ownershipownership-- publiclypublicly ownedowned

-- costcost andand subsidysubsidy reductionreduction-- privateprivate companycompany

-- sufficientsufficient profit ?profit ?-- returnreturn onon equityequity,, onon assetsassets ??

�� World Bank World Bank covenantcovenant: 100 % : 100 % operationaloperationalratioratio = non profit = non profit undertakingundertaking ??



ProfitabilityProfitability

�� 1. 1. AltmarkAltmark--CaseCase; 3rd ; 3rd principleprinciple::-- WhatWhat’’ss aa „„reasonablereasonable profitprofit”” ??

�� 2. 2. WarrantedWarranted dividenddividend (2(2--3%) Hamburg3%) Hamburg�� 3. WB: 3. WB: OperationalOperational ratioratio = 100 %= 100 %�� 4. 4. RealReal resultresult:: CostCost recoveryrecovery = 20= 20--80 %80 %

ThereThere’’ss aa strongstrong needneed amongamong operators operators totodefinedefine clearclear requirementrequirement andand performanceperformanceindicatorsindicators espesp.. underunder competitivecompetitive circumstancescircumstances!!



Mini European benchmark (1)Cost recovery

Működési ráfordítások fedezete(2004)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Budapest Prága Barcelona Hamburg

Utasok által fedezett Támogatásokból fedezet Egyéb bevételekből fedezett Fedezetlen




Mini European benchmark (2)Efficiency and subsidy

Hatékonyság és támogatottság(2004)

0

10

20

30

40


Egységnyi teljesítmény (1000 fhkm) előállításának költsége (euro)Egységnyi teljesítmény (1000 fhkm) állami és önkormányzati támogatása (euro)



TotalTotal costcost per per spacespace--kmkm



LossLoss makingmaking,, underfinancedunderfinanced orornonnon--profit profit sectorsector??

�� LossLoss makingmaking–– accountingaccounting categorycategory–– operationaloperational ratioratio belowbelow 100100–– companycompany couldcould be stabil be stabil byby cashcash--flowflow andand operationallyoperationally–– chancechance forfor appearanceappearance ofinternalofinternal debtdebt

�� UnderfinancedUnderfinanced–– financialfinancial categorycategory ((operatiooperatio,, investmentinvestment oror inin bothboth aspectaspect))–– liquidityliquidity problemsproblems ((occasionaloccasional,, permanentpermanent))–– undercapitalizedundercapitalized companycompany–– forcedforced credit, credit, debtdebt service service spiralspiral

�� NonNon--profit profit socialsocial service service sectorsector??�� OrOr listedlisted onon thethe stockstock exchangeexchange??



EffectivenessEffectiveness asas aa targettarget ofofpassengerpassenger ((andand locallocal authorityauthority))

�� AccessibilityAccessibility -- networknetwork densitydensity,, realreal--timetimeinformationinformation, service , service forfor handicappedhandicapped,,interoperabilityinteroperability

�� AvailabiltyAvailabilty -- capacitycapacity,, frequencyfrequency,, reliabilityreliability,,flexibilityflexibility

�� AttractivityAttractivity –– safetysafety,, comfortcomfort,, traveltravel timetime,, costcost--valuevalue raterate, extra , extra servicesservices

�� CostCost levellevel ofof privateprivate carcar –– fuelfuel,, roadroad--priceingpriceing



BeimBeim ööffentlichenffentlichen VerkehrVerkehr liegtliegtÖÖsterreichsterreich an 1.an 1. StelleStelle derder EUEU

Quelle: VCÖ 2005

3,02,82,72,72,72,62,5

2,32,12,0

1,81,6

1,3

0,9

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

LT SI UK D E F CZ S I DK SK L HU A1.00

0P

erso

nenk

ilom

eter

pro

Per

son

und

Jahr



Modal share of motorized trips in the urban area, 2004Res: Urban Transport Benchmarking Initiative, 2005. (UITP)




Modal share of passenger transport



Travel cost in €/km by PT based on PPP1,00

1,00

0,97

0,87

0,83

0,79

0,79

0,77

0,71

0,71

0,68

0,68

0,63

0,60

0,54

0,54

0,48

0,40

0,40

0,33

0,29

0,19

0,15

0,09

Aalborg

Oulu

The Hague

Oxford

Mersey side

Warsaw

Copenhagen

Rotterdam

Brussels

Ly on

London

Lisbon

Dublin

Barcelona

Brescia

Bologna

Alicante

Prague

Budapest

Athens

Buchkarest

Brist rol

Belfast

Stuttgart



ServicesServices byby branchesbranches (2002)(2002)

Alicante Belfast Brüsszel Budapest Dublin Merseyside Prága Rotterdam Stuttgart

Közúti járművek Villamos Light rail Metró Elővárosi vasút Egyéb modal



Mini benchmark (3)Effectiveness in tariffs

Jegy- és bérletárak(euro, 2004)

217,73%

100,00%

55,10%

156,91%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45


Jegyár Bérletár Tanuló bérletár Jegyár PPP alapon a budapestihez képest



Mini benchmark (4) Performed services by the operators

Mit nyújt a szolgáltató az utasnak?(2004)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


Átlagos sebesség (km/h) Hálózati ellátottság (km / km2) Egy lakosra jutó teljesítmény (1000 fhkm / lakos)



GeneralGeneral conclusionconclusion

• Harmonization of actual legislation (region)• Introduction of the new Eurpean market

regulation with reflecting KPI-s• Clarification of existing tripartite responsibilities• Generally established transport organising

authorities – obligatory cooperation• New financing structures in the fully

harmonized interoperability• Subsidiarity in the sectoral/regional market

regulation• European Codex for passengers and operators




GeneralGeneral conclusionconclusion (2)(2)- To achieve the secure financial background of a

cohesionally balanced public tarnsport service- To internalize the external cost effects on the

market – especially the environmental damages- 100 % cost recovery for PT operators with a

modest profitability- Balanced investment and operational policy- Involvement of new financial resources- Harmonized public and individual financing- Demand to differ metropolises, medium size cities

and villages



ConclusionConclusion onon efficiencyefficiencyIncreaseIncrease ofof revenuesrevenues�� DecreaseDecrease ofof tarifftariff evasionevasion�� IncreaseIncrease ofof numbernumber ofof passengerspassengers�� ExternalExternal revenuesrevenues ((a.oa.o.. advertisingadvertising))DecreaseDecrease ofof costcost elementselements�� PassengerPassenger accountingaccounting systemsystem, marketing, marketing�� RationalizationRationalization ofof thethe performanceperformance andand labourlabourOtherOther advantagesadvantages�� New New tarifftariff systemsystem basedbased onon servicesservices�� SusidizationSusidization byby differentdifferent stakeholdersstakeholders�� ImproveImprove thethe service service cultureculture andand tarveltarvel customscustoms�� ReductionReduction ofof cashcash downdown�� HideHide thethe cashcash!!



ConclusionConclusion onon sustainabilitysustainability„„WhoWho shouldshould paypay thethe ferryferry--manman??””

ContradictoryContradictory requirementsrequirements setset bybystakeholdersstakeholders confuseconfuse thethe cleancleanentrepreneurentrepreneur attitudeattitude..

DefinitionDefinition ofof minimum minimum publicpublic service service levellevel..SocialSocial subsidysubsidy coveredcovered byby thethe authoritiesauthoritiesInternalizationInternalization ofof externalexternal costcost effectseffectsNormativeNormative PS PS financingfinancing espesp.. inin casecase ofof

availabilityavailability--costcost elementselements..



SubsidiaritySubsidiarity vsvs.. subsidysubsidy�� The The subsidiaritysubsidiarity principleprinciple is is intendedintended toto ensureensure thatthat

decisionsdecisions areare takentaken asas closelyclosely asas possiblepossible toto thethe citizencitizen andandthatthat constantconstant checkschecks areare mademade asas toto whetherwhether actionaction atatCommunityCommunity levellevel is is justifiedjustified inin thethe lightlight ofof thethe possibilitiespossibilitiesavailableavailable atat nationalnational,, regionalregional oror locallocal levellevel.. SpecificallySpecifically,, ititis is thethe principleprinciple wherebywhereby thethe UnionUnion doesdoes notnot taketake actionaction((exceptexcept inin thethe areasareas whichwhich fallfall withinwithin itsits exclusiveexclusivecompetencecompetence)) unlessunless itit is more is more effectiveeffective thanthan actionaction takentakenatat nationalnational,, regionalregional oror locallocal levellevel.. ItIt is is closelyclosely boundbound upupwithwith thethe principlesprinciples ofof proportionalityproportionality andand necessitynecessity,, whichwhichrequirerequire thatthat anyany actionaction byby thethe UnionUnion shouldshould notnot gogo beyondbeyondwhatwhat is is necessarynecessary toto achieveachieve thethe objectivesobjectives ofof thethe TreatyTreaty..

�� AndAnd whatwhat aboutabout thethe PT PT subsidiessubsidies??



International Association of PublicTransport

The Financing of PublicTransport Operations

- A UITP POSITION PAPER -

April 2003



ThankThank youyou forfor youryour kindkindattentionattention!!

Botond Botond AbaAba




�� EurEur. Ing. Botond . Ing. Botond AbaAba

�� EE--mail: mail: ababotond@[email protected]�� PhonePhone/fax: +36 1 3870868/fax: +36 1 3870868�� Mobil: +36 209 123 589Mobil: +36 209 123 589

�� MailMail: H: H--1038 Budapest,Pusztak1038 Budapest,Pusztakúúti ti úút 48/A, t 48/A, HungaryHungary

1

MADRID´S BETS ONINTERMODALITY

Javier AldecoaSubdirector of Intermodality

Consorcio Transportes Madrid(PTA of Madrid Region)

Madrid Region

Public transport supply and demand (2004)

A-6

A-2

A-3

A-4

A-5

A-1

Objectives about intermodality

• Creation of different rings ofinterchanges all around Madridcity for reducing the time of thejourney.

• Looking for efficiency of publictransport.

• Increase the qualitystandards of intermodality.

• Real time information.

• Real sense of security.

• Effectiveness in themanagement of interchanges.

Intermodality plans since 1986 to 2013

1986 – 2000 Implementation of intermodality(administrative, fare and infrastructural integration)

2004 – 2007 First ring of urban interchanges plan construction(inside Madrid city)

2007 – 2011 Second ring of regional interchanges plan construction(metropolitan area)

2007 – 2011 Park & Ride plan construction(50,000 parking places)

2009 – 2013 Bus lanes plan construction(under principal highways)

Interchanges plan construction: 1990 - 2000

• Interchanges plan

2000. Av. América1995. Moncloa

1992. Pza Castilla

2

Interchanges Plan construction: 1990 - 2000

PLAZA DE CASTILLA, 1992:• On-surface construction of bus terminal.• Priority: re-allocate suburban buses stops located

around the square.• Paid by an Urban planning & transport development

agreement.

MONCLOA,1995:• Underground station.• Paid by the Administration.• The transport operators didn´t want to manage

the interchange.• Construction of a new metro circular line.• Construction of the Bus/HOV lane.

AV. AMÉRICA, 2000:• Underground station.• Priority: direct access by tunnel.• 100% privately financed, concession

based on fee/user. Only one tender. • Madrid city Urban Interchanges

2007. New Pza. Castilla

2007. Pza. Elíptica

2007. Príncipe Pío

2007. New Moncloa

Urban Interchanges Plan construction 2004 - 2007

General information about main interchanges

3

8

13

210,500

32

400

28,300

50

PríncipePío

10232Number of Metrolines

48101614Number of Urbanbus lines

99143735Number ofSuburban bus lines

966,100126,300269,300360,000Demand (pax/day)

133204536Number of bays

3,2506001,2501,000Tunnels (m)

178,35029,70074,35046,000Surface (m2)

3005010298Investment (M EUR)

TOTALPlazaElíptica

Plaza deCastilla

Moncloa

Problems about the construction and management• The land is always occupied by other infrastructures, urban

services,…

• Private holders operates under an economic cost-benefit scheme,public authorities look for public transport quality as a whole;which means that control tools.

• Very short political periods (4 years) for thinking,planning, building up and inaugurated.

• Long period for maintenance (35 years).

• Regional Interchanges

Regional Interchanges Plan construction: 2007- 2011 Problems about the regional interchanges

• The use and property of the land.

• Privately financed. Not all of them are profitable.

• Lower demand than Madrid city Interchanges.

• Very short political periods (4 years) to persuade the town councilfor thinking, planning, obtaining the land and building up.

• Long period for maintenance (35 years).

3

Park & Ride Plan construction: 2007 - 2011

• Regional Park & Ride

Problems about the Park & Rides

• The benefit is for Madrid city. The property of the land is of othermunicipality. Who does pay?

• Privately financed. All of them are unprofitable.

• Huge land surface required in very good accessibility point in areally congested metropolitan area or very expensiveinfrastructure if we choose to create a park-building.

• The maintenance P&R is very expensive related with the lowincome.

• Bus lanes

Bus lanes construction: 2009 - 2013 Problems about the Bus lanes.

• The highways belong to the Central government and to Madridmunicipality. The public transport belongs to the RegionalGovernment. The land belong to the local governments.

• It´s necessary a complete agreement between PublicAdministrations.

• Lack of space for additional lanes in consolidated central town(Madrid).

• Very expensive joints solutions.

Thanks for your attention!www.ctm-madrid.es

[email protected]

1

www.kk.dk

Traffic safetyLocal trends, organisation and practical actions

Szentendre, 7th of March

CITY OF COPENHAGENTechnical and Environmental Administration Roads & Parks

Local trends, organisation and practical actions in urban road safety

Maria Wass-DanielsenMunicipality of Copenhagen

www.kk.dk




Suggestions for the European Commission

� Harmonizing data collection techniques

� Annual European Road Safety Conference

� Closer cooperation with car industry

� Establishment of funding stream

� Closer cooperation between EC and networks such asEUROCITIES

www.kk.dk




Our dream for the City of Copenhagen

� a unique European metropolis with a flourishing city life� a city where the number of cyclists is increasing and

where every opportunity is accessible to everyone

www.kk.dk




An important precondition

A feeling of safety and security for citizens in traffic

www.kk.dk




Safety trends and developments in Copenhagen

Killed and seriously injured

Old goal

www.kk.dk




Close cooperation between national and local authorities

� National level (National Safety Plan, campaigns, changes to the law)

� Local level (action taken by police)

2

www.kk.dk




Change in road user behavior

� Traffic safety campaigns

� The important role of the press

www.kk.dk




Targeting rebuilding projects

Crossroads rebuilding projects, 2002-2004, were a big factor in 50% fewer deaths and serious injuries

www.kk.dk




New Traffic Safety Plan

Target 2012: 40% reduction in number of killed and seriously injured

Killed and seriously injured

Old goalNew goal

www.kk.dk




Focus Areas in Traffic Safety Plan

� Accidents involving cyclists� Accidents to pedestrians� Accidents at crossroads� Accidents involving young, high-risk, male motorists� Innovation

www.kk.dk




Traffic Safety Situation Worldwide

� 2004: road crashes were the second highest cause of death among people aged 5-29 (WHO)

� 1 million people die and more than 50 million are annually injured in road accidents

www.kk.dk




Traffic safety situation in EU

Start of the decade: 50.000 killed in road accidents - UNACCEPTABLE!

The number of accidents varies a lot between member states

3

www.kk.dk




Our Expectations from EU

Harmonizing data collection techniques

Background: Difficult to compare accident data between member states because of different methods and criteria

www.kk.dk





Annual European Road Safety Conference

Background: need to exchange experiences between countries, to improve legislation, engineering and education

www.kk.dk





Closer cooperation with car industry

Background: analysis of accidents between trucks and cyclists shows that the EU must tighten rules to optimize drivers’ view e.g. external mirrors

www.kk.dk





Establishment of funding stream

Closer cooperation between EC and networks such as Eurocities

www.kk.dk





Clear and detailed goal

Focus on pedestrians and cyclists

mopeds

motor bikes

pedestrians

car drivers

cyclists

1

Security in Public Transport

Andrea SoehnchenDivision and Commission Manager

Dept. Knowledge and Membership Services

Workshop

Public transport, intermodality and intelligent transport

Szentendre07 March 2007

Public transport systems are vulnerable

�Open and accessible

�High number of passengers

�Indispensable for a city’s functioning

�Mobility is a key element of modern lifestyle

Involvement of PT stakeholders

Reason:Responsibility for passengers, staff, systems

Role as partner of:–Governments–Industry–First responders–General public and Media

Scope of security strategies

�Addressing all phases of incident management–Prevention–Preparedness / Response–Recovery

�Involving all relevant approaches –Design of infrastructure, rolling stock and equipment–Human factors–Surveillance and detection technology–Management and cooperation

Challenges

�Think about the problem in quiet times!

�Build partnerships and resilience teams!

�Share knowledge to learn from existing experience!

�Educate, train and practice!

Thank you for your attention!

For more information:

[email protected]. +32-2-663 6640

1

Page 1

Preparation for the Green Paper on Urban Preparation for the Green Paper on Urban TransportTransport

The Role of ITS in the Provision of Safe & Sustainable Urban Transport

Ken LaughlinHampshire County Council & POLIS

Third Technical Workshop

Public Transport, Intermodality & Intelligent Transport

Szentendre, Hungary

7 March 2007 Third Technical Workshop, Public Transport, Intermodality & Intelligent Transport,Szentendre, Hungary, 7 March 2007

The Role of ITS within an The Role of ITS within an Integrated Transport StrategyIntegrated Transport Strategy

Introductiono Policy backgroundo What are the challenges /opportunities?o Increasing role of ITSo What are the opportunities for ITS in safe

& sustainable transport?o Summary & Conclusions

Third Technical Workshop, Public Transport, Intermodality & Intelligent Transport,Szentendre, Hungary, 7 March 2007

Policy BackgroundPolicy Background

o Increasing traffic levels, congestion, emissions, casualties have required a review of transport policies

o Interaction with other policies e.g. economy, planning, social etc

o ITS increasingly featuring in European, National, Regional and Local Policies

o ITS already has a role to play in delivering transport policy objectives

…….. but there are challenges to extract the best from the potential that ITS can offer


What are the mobility challenges What are the mobility challenges for 2020? (1)for 2020? (1)

Overarching Local Transport Plan policies and objectives:

o reduce the effect & impact of congestiono promote safety / securityo increase accessibilityo improve air qualityo support wider quality of life issues (social exclusion)o encourage value for money and efficient asset

managemento widen travel choiceo ensure sustainabilityo ensure economic vitality


o Increasing emphasis on the integration of different tools to deliver new and enhanced services and facilities.

e.go demand responsive transporto co-modalityo freight deliveryo personalised & mobile travel serviceso road user/congestion charging o network management / reliabilityo measurement and monitoringo cooperative vehicle / highway systemso integrated ticketingo reducing emissions

What are the mobility challenges What are the mobility challenges for 2020? (2)for 2020? (2)


Other Challenges & OpportunitiesOther Challenges & Opportunities

Challenges / Barriers / Opportunities?o Politicalo Technologicalo Organisationalo Financialo Jurisdictional

2

Page 2


Core Transport Long Term Strategy / PhilosophyCore Transport Long Term Strategy / Philosophy

o Reduce

o Manage

o Invest

Recognition that transport problems can often be tackled by non transport means

Holistic approachThird Technical Workshop, Public Transport, Intermodality & Intelligent Transport,Szentendre, Hungary, 7 March 2007

Core Transport Long Term Strategy/PhilosophyCore Transport Long Term Strategy/Philosophy

Reduce:o Reduce the number of

journeys made, and the average length of journeys where there is no impact on quality of life or the economy

o Land use policieso Travel planning and

other initiativeso Marketing

behavioural changeo Discourage

unnecessary journeys through demand management


Core Transport Long Term Strategy/PhilosophyCore Transport Long Term Strategy/Philosophy

Manage:o the existing transport

networks effectively to make best use of existing capacity

o Minimise delays and improve journey time reliability

o Traffic management, inc ITSo Junction improvements and

local bypasseso Continued commitment to

road safety and casualty reduction

o Improved information to the travelling public and businesses about travel options


Core Transport Long Term Strategy / PhilosophyCore Transport Long Term Strategy / Philosophy

Invest:o in additional capacity,

where shown to be essential with emphasis will be given to investing in public transport networks, particularly those catering for shorter journeys

o Improved public transport as alternative to car, especially for shorter journeys

o Measures to promote public transport links to the main transport hubs

o Improved walking and cycling facilities

o Improvements to ferry services and their interchanges

o Road improvements to create more capacity


ITS

Transport Related Information and Transport Related Information and Communications Technology DevelopmentCommunications Technology Development

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Area Traffic ControlMotorway Control

Urban Traffic Control

Telematics

CVHS

TIH

UTMC

Internet

Integrated Systems Control

GPSWireless Communications

Technology

Rat

eo

fD

evel

opm

ent

ISA


InIn--vehicle Systemsvehicle Systemso Market penetration increasing

o As equipment prices decreaseo Becoming a more standard option in vehicleso Key input is improving quantity and quality of data

o Dynamic navigationo Satellite based with digital mapping & traffic information channels

o Traffic informationo Good systems emerging (TMC, new digital media like DAB)

o Vehicle safety systemso Adaptive speed control, vehicle collision alert, lane keeping, HMI

This sector is market led but needs encouragement

3

Page 3


STOPWATCH EMS Kiosks TRAFFIC INFO - VMS CCTV UTC CAR PARK - VMS PELICAN CROSSING

ITS REQUIREMENTS INCORPORATED WITHIN EACH TRANSPORT STRATEGY

WORLD WIDE WEB RADIO/MEDIA

HAMPSHIRE TRAFFIC AND TRAVEL INFORMATION CENTRE (TTIC)

COUNTYWIDE ITS SYSTEMS

DEPLOYMENT OF INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMS (ITS)Third Technical Workshop, Public Transport, Intermodality & Intelligent Transport,Szentendre, Hungary, 7 March 2007

London Traffic Systems Vision Business ActivitiesLondon Traffic Systems Vision Business Activities

IE

Transport for London Transport for London –– Traffic Systems Vision Traffic Systems Vision Business activity modelBusiness activity model


Peer to Peer

Bus with GPS Receiverand Radio Transmitter

GPS SatelliteConstellation

MicrowaveLink

Radio message:Contains location +bus operating information

AVL BaseStation & RTI

Information Base

UTMCSCOOT and IMFControl Instation

TrafficSignals

TS Controllers

On-streetVehicle

Detection

Landline/ RadioCommunications

Network

Enforcement Camera linked to BusGPS - On Bus and Roadside versions

Route 62 : 6 Mins

Route 62 : 16 Mins

12/10/04 12:58:03

Radio Link

PassengerInformation

Display

BusStop

“Delivering a BIASed Future for Glasgow”


ITS within an integrated transport ITS within an integrated transport strategy (1)strategy (1)

ITS should not be seen:o in isolationo as technology driven

ITS can:o provide the flexibility in delivering policies, objectives

and serviceso be used to complement or enhance traditional

transport facilitieso manage demand and make the best use of the

existing assets and infrastructureo provide a cost effective solution compared to road

building or major infrastructure provision



Can deliver innovative solutions & the integration of different tools to deliver new and enhanced services and facilities.e.g

o demand responsive transporto co-modalityo freight deliveryo personalised & mobile travel

serviceso road user/congestion charging o network management / reliabilityo measurement and monitoringo cooperative vehicle / highway

systemso integrated ticketingo reducing emissions



…. But to be effective needs to take account of:

Policy objectivesUser needs

Stakeholders

Requirements definition

Systems architecture

4

Page 4


Communications

Across Systems

Across Geographic Boundaries

Inte

gra

tio

n

Across Institutional Boundaries

Ticketing

Cross Sector Services (not just Transport)

Partnerships

Across Modes

Policies

Transport and Land Use Planning

Within Systems


ITS Integration DriversITS Integration Drivers

Traffic Management Act

Local Transport Plan

Asset Management

Efficiency Savings (Gershon)

Managing and maintaining thetransport network more

efficiently and effectively

Congestion

Accessibility

Air Quality

Road Safety

Enforcement

Monitoring

•Network management

•Targets


Integration ChallengeIntegration Challenge


Integration within ITSIntegration within ITS

“ITS offers immense scope for integration and some argue that it is only through integration of ITS components that ITS will achieve its full impact”

PIARC ITS Handbook 2nd Edition - 2004


EU Urban Transport PolicyEU Urban Transport Policyo Cities & regions have a role to play in defining an

EU transport policy

o There should be greater integration with other policy areas

o EU transport policy should be developed within a broad framework basis

o Policy should not be regulatory

o Policy should support Cities/Regions in developing/implementing new transport tools by removing barriers and/or developing EU wide enabling framework

o Policy should consider modal shift as one of it’s main objectives


Role of ITS in Urban Transport Role of ITS in Urban Transport PolicyPolicy

ITS deployment could be facilitated by:o Standardso Interoperabilityo New technological solutions

Policy should:o encourage exploitation of ITS in traditional & non traditional

areaso promote innovation (policy & technological) to:

o improve mobility / accessibility / air quality / safetyo support EU industryo improve coordination

5

Page 5


Specific ITS Actions at the EU LevelSpecific ITS Actions at the EU Levelo Embed ITS as a core element of EU urban transport policyo Comprehensive inventory of ITS applications for towns & citieso Build on the existing developments & innovationo Good practice guide for developing a cohesive ITS deployment plan

covering:o Needs of the cityo Interoperabilityo Identification of the legal, organisational, financial, and jurisdictional issueso Identification & engagement with stakeholders – partnership workingo Implementation of deployment planso Evaluation of results – identification of benefits

o Creation of a framework for the collection / dissemination of best practiceo Proactive demonstration programme with cities involvement


Summary & Conclusions (1)Summary & Conclusions (1)

Summaryo ITS has significant role to play in safe &

sustainable urban transport

o Impacts on other policy areas

o Can help deliver new, innovative & cost effective solutions

o Increasing role in urban and rural areas

o Part of access to wider services

o Urban/inter-urban network

o Regional/sub-regional


Summary & Conclusions (2)Summary & Conclusions (2)Need to Address:-

o Integration of Services / Informationo Joint agency workingo Communicationso Standards & interoperability

Institutional, legal & financial issues can be overcome

Flexibility to give local authorities the tools to apply the best strategy

ITS should not be seen in isolation ITS should not be seen in isolation -- must be a core element of must be a core element of a European Integrated Transport Policya European Integrated Transport Policy



1

-1-

TRANSPORT POLICYin Paris

TRANSPORT POLICYTRANSPORT POLICYin Parisin Paris

DEPARTMENT OF ROADS AND MOBILITY MANAGEMENT

7th march 2007

-2-

Description of the problemsand challengesDescription of the problemsand challenges

11

The main policies adopted orto be adopted

2

Measures implemented or tobe implemented with an ITSdimension

3

DEPARTMENT OF ROADS AND MOBILITY MANAGEMENT -3-

11 -- DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEMS AND CHALLENGES

A public health and sustainabledevelopment challengeA public health and sustainabledevelopment challenge

11

A social and socially-oriented challenge toimprove mobility for everyone

2

An urban challenge to make moreattractive and better share public space

3

An economic challenge to promote Paris’seconomic health and that of theagglomeration

4

A regional challenge: to build regionalsolidarity

5

-4-

Transport:70% of Nitrogen Oxide

40% of Volatile Organic Compounds40% of suspended particles (PM10)

Transport:70% of Nitrogen Oxide

40% of Volatile Organic Compounds40% of suspended particles (PM10)

The Ile-de-France region11 million inhabitants

5 million jobs12. 000 sq.kms.

The Ile-de-France region11 million inhabitants

5 million jobs12. 000 sq.kms.

1 -1 A public health and sustainable development challenge

Urbanised area

Airport-reserved installation

Rural area

Woods and forestsRiverBoundaries of the Ile-de-France “départements”

Boundary of the City of Paris

New town

-5-

A study conducted byAIRPARIF, an independent

organisation

A study conducted byAIRPARIF, an independent

organisation

1 -1 A public health and sustainable development challenge

-

The decrease in Nitrogen Oxide emissions linked to Paristraffic:32 % between 2002 and 2007;6% of it as a direct result of traffic decrease;

Carbon dioxide emissions expected in 2007 compared to2002:has gone down 9 % : linked entirely to public road works andtraffic decreases in ParisDevelopments in vehicle array would have led to 2 % extracarbon dioxide in Paris if the traffic hadn’t decreased

-

The decrease in Nitrogen Oxide emissions linked to Paristraffic:32 % between 2002 and 2007;6% of it as a direct result of traffic decrease;

Carbon dioxide emissions expected in 2007 compared to2002:has gone down 9 % : linked entirely to public road works andtraffic decreases in ParisDevelopments in vehicle array would have led to 2 % extracarbon dioxide in Paris if the traffic hadn’t decreased

-6-


A public health and sustainabledevelopment challenge

1


3


4


5

A social and socially-oriented challengeto improve mobility for everyoneA social and socially-oriented challengeto improve mobility for everyone

22

2

-7-



1


4


5


2

An urban challenge to make moreattractive and better share public spaceAn urban challenge to make moreattractive and better share public space

33

-8-

cars and two-wheeled motorisedvehicles (circulating and parking)

- occupy 93% of the road surface,

- though accounting for 61% of surfacemechanised journeys

In Paris, road space isunequally shared

11 –– 3 An urban challenge to make more attractive and better3 An urban challenge to make more attractive and bettershare public spaceshare public space

-9-



1


5


2

An economic challenge to promoteParis’s economic health and that ofthe agglomeration

An economic challenge to promoteParis’s economic health and that ofthe agglomeration

44


3

-10-



1


2


3


4

A regional challenge: to build regionalsolidarityA regional challenge: to build regionalsolidarity

55

-11-

The borough of Paris : 20 districts

Paris = 1 administrative regionalsubdivision (“département”)

Paris and its immediatesurrounding area

- administrative boundaries -

Paris2.1 million inhabitants

1.8 million jobs105 km2.

11 –– 5 A regional challenge, to build regional solidarity5 A regional challenge, to build regional solidarity

borough boundaryregional sub-division boundary

50% of the Francilian population

60% of the Region’s jobs

90% of journeys by public transport

-12-

Paris ⌦ Paris

6.5 million journeys- 1% from 1991 to 2001

Paris ⌦ Suburbs

3.9 million journeys

- 5% from 1991 to 2001

Suburbs ⌦ Suburbs

24.3 million journeys+ 9% from 1991 to 2001

0.8 million journeys via Paris

A constant mobility pattern since 1976 :3.5 trips / person

The entire Ile-de-Franceregion

35.16 million journeys

+ 4% from 1991 to 2001


3

-13-


Paris <-> Parisand

Paris <-> suburb

The wholeof the Ile-de-France

publictransport

cars

The car represents 81% ofsuburbs to suburbs journeys

67%

61%

33%

suburb

suburb<->

taxistaxis

2 wheels2 wheels

4%

1%

81%

3%

1%

16%3%

1%

+ =

Public transport takes care of almost 60%of Paris-Paris and Paris-suburbs journeys

29%

EGT 2001EGT 2001EGT 2001EGT 2001 -14-

Tramway : 20 km20 kmUnderground : 211 kmRailway network : 293 kmTotal : 524 km

Public transport networkParis and close surroundings

underground

tramway

RER

SNCF suburban

SNCF mainline or TGV

Métro16 lines

297 stations211 km

1.3 billiontrips/year


-15-

● The Paris transport plan (PDP) : the transcription, on theparisian territory and by the city council, of the regionaltransport plan (PDUIF)

● Began in july 2005 (delay due to restrictive regulatoryframework)

● A real participatory process :− Coproduction by 98 local neighbourhood comitees and the 20

districts− 50 meetings with other city councils concerned (at the border

of Paris)− A large survey : 140,000 questionnaires returned− Working groups with transport institutions, economic, social and

environmental interests

● A project adopted by the city council in february 2007

● The Paris transport plan (PDP) : the transcription, on theparisian territory and by the city council, of the regionaltransport plan (PDUIF)

● Began in july 2005 (delay due to restrictive regulatoryframework)

● A real participatory process :− Coproduction by 98 local neighbourhood comitees and the 20

districts− 50 meetings with other city councils concerned (at the border

of Paris)− A large survey : 140,000 questionnaires returned− Working groups with transport institutions, economic, social and

environmental interests

● A project adopted by the city council in february 2007www.debatdeplacements.paris.fr


-16-

The regional transport plan : le Plan de DéplacementsUrbains d’Ile-de-France (PDUIF)

● Adopted in 2000

● Targets for 2006 :

− overall 3% traffic drop, 5% traffic drop inside Paris (inPV*km)

− 10% increase in walking modal share for short trips (<1km)and trips from house to school

− doubling bicycle use− % increase of waterborne and rail modal shares for the

transport of goods

Region and STIF (the public transport authority within theIle-de-France region) have to evaluate and revise the plan

● Adopted in 2000

● Targets for 2006 :

− overall 3% traffic drop, 5% traffic drop inside Paris (inPV*km)

− 10% increase in walking modal share for short trips (<1km)and trips from house to school

− doubling bicycle use− % increase of waterborne and rail modal shares for the

transport of goods

Region and STIF (the public transport authority within theIle-de-France region) have to evaluate and revise the plan

22 -- 1 The transport policy on a regional scale1 The transport policy on a regional scale

-17-

The main policies adopted orto be adoptedThe main policies adopted orto be adopted

22

Description of the problemsand challenges

1


3

-18-

22-- THE MAIN POLICIES ADOPTED OR TO BE ADOPTED

Develop alternatives to individualmotorised journeysDevelop alternatives to individualmotorised journeys

11

Reduce motorised traffic on Parisianroadways

2

Place pedestrians and cyclists at theheart of the public area

3

Develop initiatives in favour of residentialparking

4

4

-19-

● The State, Region and “départements” finance heavyinvestment undertakings (trains, undergrounds, tramways,motorways and the main road network).

● The City councils undertake the lay-out and maintenance of allother public spaces. The Region and “départements” take partin the financing of environmentally- friendly alternatives androadways.

● In Paris, the national Police Force is in charge of the controland enforcement of traffic and parking

● The State, Region and “départements” finance heavyinvestment undertakings (trains, undergrounds, tramways,motorways and the main road network).

● The City councils undertake the lay-out and maintenance of allother public spaces. The Region and “départements” take partin the financing of environmentally- friendly alternatives androadways.

● In Paris, the national Police Force is in charge of the controland enforcement of traffic and parking

Institutional framework and transport networks

-20-

STIF : the public transport authority within theIle-de-France region

● It includes the Region and the 8 “départements”

● The presidency is handed by the Region

● The STIF missions : define transport supply, finance thedevelopment of networks, promote public transport services

● It approves contracts with operation companies and controltheir activity

STIF : the public transport authority within theIle-de-France region

● It includes the Region and the 8 “départements”

● The presidency is handed by the Region

● The STIF missions : define transport supply, finance thedevelopment of networks, promote public transport services

● It approves contracts with operation companies and controltheir activity

22--11 -- Paris, mobility and transport organisationParis, mobility and transport organisation

-21-

Operating companies

● RATP (RER, underground, tramway, bus) within Paris + urbanagglomeration

● SNCF (trains, RER)● OPTILE (buses outside urban agglomeration)

Operating companies

● RATP (RER, underground, tramway, bus) within Paris + urbanagglomeration

● SNCF (trains, RER)● OPTILE (buses outside urban agglomeration)

RER

22--11 -- Paris, mobility and transport organisationParis, mobility and transport organisation

-22-

● The objectives :

� A rising part of public transport, taxis, bicycle andpedestrian from 75 % in 2001 :

to 80% of journeys concerning Paris in 2013,and reaching 83% of individual journeys in 2020

� Between 2001 and 2013, a 20% increase in journeys within thepublic transport, a 30 % increase between 2001 and 2020

� An increase of bicycle journeys of 400 % is forecast between2001 and 2020

● The objectives :

� A rising part of public transport, taxis, bicycle andpedestrian from 75 % in 2001 :

to 80% of journeys concerning Paris in 2013,and reaching 83% of individual journeys in 2020

� Between 2001 and 2013, a 20% increase in journeys within thepublic transport, a 30 % increase between 2001 and 2020

� An increase of bicycle journeys of 400 % is forecast between2001 and 2020

22 -- 1 Develop alternatives to individual motorised journeys1 Develop alternatives to individual motorised journeys

-23-

22 -- 1 Develop alternatives to individual motorised journeys1 Develop alternatives to individual motorised journeysCreate new underground lines as bypasses

-24-

22 -- 1 Develop alternatives to individual motorised journeys1 Develop alternatives to individual motorised journeysCreate new tramways and dedicated bus lanes

The Paris bus network59 lines,1 726 stops,569 km

187 km of separated lanes, 70km of which are physically

separated

5

-25-

22 -- THE MAIN POLICIES ADOPTED OR TO BE ADOPTED

Reduce motorised traffic on ParisianroadwaysReduce motorised traffic on Parisianroadways

22

Develop alternatives to individualmotorised journeys

1

Place pedestrians at the heart of thepublic area

3


4

-26-

22 -- 2 Reduce motorised traffic on2 Reduce motorised traffic on parisianparisian roadwaysroadways

� Operating from Monday to Sunday, from 6.30a.m. to 0.30 a.m.Total accessibility for the mobility impaired(adapted buses and bus-stops)

The objectives :● A decrease of 40% in network traffic

by 2020 compared to 2001. A decreasein traffic of 18% against 2001 has beenmeasured in 2007

� This 40% decrease includes an increasein goods movements and services of 11%

� To stabilise the developement of two-wheeled motorised vehicles

The objectives :● A decrease of 40% in network traffic

by 2020 compared to 2001. A decreasein traffic of 18% against 2001 has beenmeasured in 2007

� This 40% decrease includes an increasein goods movements and services of 11%

� To stabilise the developement of two-wheeled motorised vehicles

-27-

Quartiers Verts – “Green Areas”22 -- 2 Reduce motorised traffic on2 Reduce motorised traffic on parisianparisian roadwaysroadways

-28-


Place pedestrians and cyclists at theheart of the public areaPlace pedestrians and cyclists at theheart of the public area

33


1


4


2

-29-

22 -- 3 Place pedestrians and cyclists at the heart of the public3 Place pedestrians and cyclists at the heart of the publicareaarea

● develop the cycling network : 500 kms in2010

● develop zones 30kms/h, green zones andnetwork, pedestrian-exclusive roadways,reverse-direction bicycle lanes

● develop the cycling network : 500 kms in2010

● develop zones 30kms/h, green zones andnetwork, pedestrian-exclusive roadways,reverse-direction bicycle lanes

-30-


Develop initiatives in favour ofresidential parkingDevelop initiatives in favour ofresidential parking

44


1

Place pedestrians and cyclists at theheart of the public area

3


2

6

-31-� Metered parking

22 -- 4 Paris City council schemes 20014 Paris City council schemes 2001 -- 20072007Parking Policy

-32-

� Lower faire for residents

Parking Policy

� Priority for residential parking

22 -- 4 Paris City council schemes 20014 Paris City council schemes 2001 -- 20072007

-33-

Description of the problemsand challenges

1

The main policies adopted2



33

-34-

33 -- MEASURES IMPLEMENTED OR TO BE IMPLEMENTED WITH ANITS DIMENSION

Facilitate professional journeysFacilitate professional journeys11

Reduce dependency on the car andencourage alternatives for journeys hometo work

2

Increase use of bicycles3

Reinforce road safety5

Create or extend new-reduced trafficsectors or roads

4

Adapt the use made of the main ring road6

-35-

33 -- 1 Facilitate professional journeys1 Facilitate professional journeys

� Deliveries on main roads

� Delivery tricycles for final deliveries

-36-


Reduce dependency on the car andencourage alternatives for journeyshome to work

Reduce dependency on the car andencourage alternatives for journeyshome to work

22




4


Facilitate professional journeys1

7

-37-


Increase use of bicyclesIncrease use of bicycles33



4




2

-38-

A self service bicycles

1000 points available on july 2007 with 14 100 bicycles

An objective of 1451 points at the end of 2007with 20 600 bicycles

The First half hour, free of chargeEasy use for occasional or regular cyclists (subscription

with a credit card)Possible to know in real time bicycles’s position and trips

A self service bicycles

1000 points available on july 2007 with 14 100 bicycles

An objective of 1451 points at the end of 2007with 20 600 bicycles

The First half hour, free of chargeEasy use for occasional or regular cyclists (subscription

with a credit card)Possible to know in real time bicycles’s position and trips

33-- 3 An increase use of bicycles3 An increase use of bicycles

-39-






2


Create or extend new-reduced trafficsectors or roadsCreate or extend new-reduced trafficsectors or roads

44

-40-





2



4

Reinforce road safetyReinforce road safety55

-41-




2



4

Adapt the use made of the main ringroadAdapt the use made of the main ringroad

66


-42-

2

30 km

5 to 10 km

3 ring-roads around Paris:BP, A86, Francilienne

33 -- 6 Adapt the use made of the main ring road6 Adapt the use made of the main ring road

8

-43-

The Boulevard Périphérique Management

-- First ring road around ParisFirst ring road around Paris

-- 3535 kmskms longlong

-- 33 ouou 4 traffic lanes in each direction4 traffic lanes in each direction

-- 1 million vehicles daily1 million vehicles daily � 10,600 incidents / accidents yearly

● Regulating maximum speed allowed in real time● Regulating Heavy Goods Vehicle traffic according

to their size, extent of pollution and theirdestination

● Implementing new ways of working and priority fortaxis, emergency service vehicles, vehicles forcar pooling, the less polluting vehicles, expressbus lines

● Regulating maximum speed allowed in real time● Regulating Heavy Goods Vehicle traffic according

to their size, extent of pollution and theirdestination

● Implementing new ways of working and priority fortaxis, emergency service vehicles, vehicles forcar pooling, the less polluting vehicles, expressbus lines

-44-

DEPARTMENT OF ROADSDEPARTMENT OF ROADSANDAND

MOBILITY MANAGEMENTMOBILITY MANAGEMENT

ThankThank youyou forfor youryour attentionattention

Azienda Mobilità e Infrastrutture di Genova S.p.A.

A policy driven approach to ITS - DGTREN Green Paper preparation Budapest - 7 3 07

ITS ITS implementationimplementation andand managementmanagementDGTREN Green Paper preparation DGTREN Green Paper preparation

Budapest 7 3 07Budapest 7 3 07

AlexioAlexio PiccoPicco

Head of ITS Projects UnitHead of ITS Projects Unit





Genoa: same overall problems (congestion, pollution,...) with a big problem in the lack of space



4. INTERMEDIATE FLEXIBLE SERVICES

2. INTEGRATED ACCESS RESTRICTIONS and PRICING

1. PARKING MGM

5. DISTRIBUTION OF GOODS

6. INFOMOBILITY

3. PUBLIC TRANSPORT

7. SAFETY AND SECURITY

Integrated Urban Mobility Policies and ITS



Obstacles/barriers in ITS implementation

� Change resistance

� Development of a comprehensive evaluation plan (impacts and processes)

� Many actors involved in the implementation plan

� Integration between different systems

� Lack of strategic overview and lack of coordination

� Difficult estimation of all related costs

� Each system is a “customised solution”



Recommendations for other cities

� ITS means innovative systems and services; they need political supportthey need political support

� Support EU and national R&D projects

� Use projects as start up for systems and services that should be economically sustainable

� Develop a coherent business plan (implementation and management)

� Create integration with IT systems of other policy areas (i.e. environment)

� Develop ITS in an “user friendly” way

� Create partnerships

� Involve stakeholders



Recommendations for ITS actions at EU level

� Define main criteria for interoperability of systems and services

� Support the development and the use of standards

� Develop ITS in new areas (walking, cycling, goods, ..)

� Support of large ITS demonstration “policy driven” projects with strong involvement of the

cities at political and technical level (integrated approach, also outside mobility, ITS

focused,...digital sites..)

� Support take-up actions from “advanced” cities to “learning cities” (i.e. Genoa – Krakow)



1 suggested area for ITS actions at EU level

-20% traffic means....... –2 car trips per week…….need of personalised, intermediate, flexible,“on demand” services

1

Dr. habil Janos MONIGL, TRANSMAN Kft.www.transman.hu / [email protected]

Contribution of E-ticketing toEnsuring Interoperability and

Managing Public Transport Services

(REC, Szentendre 7. March 2007)

2

Vision of the ELEKTRA Hungaria System

3

Basic Interoperability Requirementsof ELEKTRA Hungaria

ELEKTRA: with contactless, reloadable cards:

� Interoperability by combining of part systems. (Declaration!)� Unified fare media (chip cards) for different passenger groups.� Unified card structure, contents and formats.� Unified fare product type catalogue, open for local specific needs.� Unified discount (concession) types for different traveller groups.� Unified identification system for devices, services and travel links.� Unified technical requirements for cards and communication.� Compatible data collection, transfer and processing.� Central key generation and management.� Independency of sub-system applicants from system suppliers.� Examples: Holland, Denmark, Norway; Germany (VDV-KA)?� Dilemma: uniformity vs. versatility.

4

Different Ways to Create anInteroperable National Card System

5

Deciding RelationsRegarding Public Transport

Central governmentLocal government

Operator 2Operator 1

Inhabitants

Passengers

Contract(requirements,subsidies)

private ownershippublic ownership

elections

servicing

fare paying

6

Contribution of Chip-card Systemto Public Transport Management

2

7

Managing Local, Regional and Long DistanceInterurban Travels in ELEKTRA Hungaria

8

Card Choice of Traveller Groups

9

Managing Different Fare Systemson the Cards

mobile phone

local

ELEKTRAcards

rail bus

specials i nte

rnet

10

Card identifiers

1. Card objects ID

19. Card objects ID

1. Fare product data

Trip (log) data


Trip (log) data

1. Product continuation d.

Trip (log) data

7. Product continuation d.

Trip (log) data

Personal and discount data

Tot

alm

inim

um

5792

Bit

64 Bit

608 Bit

2688 Bit

1792 Bit

640 Bit

32 Bit

32 Bit

256 Bit

128 Bit

128 Bit

256 Bit

160 Bit

160 Bit

96 Bit

96 Bit

Card Data Structures and Fare Product CapabilitiesDSC-L Card Data Structure (min. 1 kbyte)

11

Card identifiers


1. Trip (log) data

Authentication data (MAC)

Buffer for trip log data and MAC

Tot

alm

inim

um

462

Bit156 Bit 156 Bit

146 Bit

64 Bit 64 Bit

64 Bit

32 Bit

Card Data Structures and Fare Product CapabilitiesPSC Card Data Structure (min. 512 bit)

12

Pricing Modes of Fare Products

Main fare product types Pre-priced

Trip-priced

Post-priced

Single-/transfer tickets +(CI) +(CI-CO) ?

Daily tickets + - ?

Season passes + - ?

Single ride relational tickets + - ?

3

13

Transport Purse

PURSE

Fare product types1. More purpose transport purse2. Daily tickets3. Season passes4. Single ride relational tickets

TRANSPORT PURSEFor single / interchange / zonal tickets(pre-priced / trip-priced payment)

14

Daily Tickets / Season Passes

LINE ZONES

AREAAREA

DAY

15

Single Ride Tickets

CDD C

DB ACMore partsingle ride ticket(pre – priced payment)

B A

AB

A

B

one partsingle ride ticket

(pre - / trip - priced payment)

16

Placing of Different Fare Productsin the Uniform Product Frames (1)

17

Placing of Different Fare Productsin the Uniform Product Frames (2)

18

Implementation of ELECTRA Part-systems

� Budapest Transport Co.� Delivery of 4 proposals Sept. 2005� Failed 2006

� Alba Volan Co.� Technical development underway� Start for pass holders 1. Okt. 2005

� Volanbusz Co.� Tender open� Gradual adaptation until the end of 2005

4

19

Different Stages of Interoperabilityin the ELEKTRA System

TRANSMAN Kft.www.transman.hu / [email protected]

Thanks for the attention!

21

Data Structure ofELEKTRA Hungaria Chip Cards (1)

Card identifiers DSC PSCCard type (4 bit) + version Nr (4 bit) 8 8Manufacturer Serial No. 32 96Issuer's ID 9 9Usage counter (bit wise in OTP area; 1 bit/max. 4 validation) - 32Card expiry date (days since 01.01.2005) 14 -Supplementary / reserved data (e.g. for card blocking) 1 64 1 146

Object identifiers (on DSC-s 19 objects can be defined)

Product/function - Memory pointer 14 -Product/function - Issuer ID 9 -Product/function - Product type ID 8 -Supplementary/reserved data 1 32

Fare product data (on DSC-s 7 products, on PSC-s 1 product can be placed)

Reloading operator ID 9 9Reloading terminal ID 15 12Date, time of reloading 24 24Product format ID 4 4Product type ID (stored value/daily ticket/season pass/single ride relational ticket) 8 8Travel link code (32 bit)/validity area code (16 bit) 32 32Service code (route/line + service) 1. direction 24 24Product supplements (1. direction) (retour, IC, 1. class; no smoker bits; placeID, group size) 28 28Service code (route/line + service) 2. direction 24 -Product supplements (2. direction) (retour, IC, 1. class; no smoker bits; placeID, group size) 28 -Product continuation block serial Nr (1…7)+type of the first (1:interm. stop; 2. side jump; 3. break point) 8 -Discount entitlement type code 8 -Validity start date (at prepaid passes (on DSC) and single relational tickets: days since 01.01.2005) 14 14Validity end date (at prepaid passes on DSC: days since 01.01.2005) 14 -Currency type and units of the product + multiplier 8 -Supplementary / reserved data (e.g. for product blocking) 8 256 1 156

(Bits)

22

Data Structure ofELEKTRA Hungaria Chip Cards (2)

Write-back trip(log) dataProduct value / remaining amount 15 12Used operator ID 9 5Check-in validation date, time (on PSCs: first validation time (hour)/start time of trip chain (minute)) 20 14Check-in/check-out place ID 16 14Check/in/check-out validator ID 15 15Product joker (at monthly pass: usage counter) (at daily ticket:start hour) (at transfer ticket: start minute) 14 -

Check-in validation counter (1…4) - 2

Validation signal code 2 1

Invoice signal code 1 -

Suplementary / reserved data 3 -Buffer controll bit 1 1

Authentication code (MAC) 32 128 32 96

Product continuation data (on DSC -s 7 continuation parts are possible)

Block serial Nr 4Product format ID 4Product type ID 8Travel link code (32 bit)/ validity area code (16 bit) 32Service code (route/line+ service) 1. direction 24Product supplements (1. direction) 28Service code (route/line+ service) 2. direction 24Product supplements (2. direction) 28Further continuation block serial Nr and type 8Supplementary / reserved data 0 160

23

Main Transaction Data on the Cards

� Loading operator ID� Loading equipment ID� Fare product type ID (auxiliary data)� Start- end point link/area ID� Validity start- end-date

� Servicing operator ID� Check-in/check-out point ID� Check-in/check out validator ID� Check-in time� Fare/remaining amount

(Log)

24

Family of Validators in the ELEKTRA System(Example)

5

25

The IDs of Actors, Cards and Devicesin ELEKTRA Hungaria

Nr. ELEKTRA Data file Filename

Size of ID Characterof the ID

1. ELEKTRA issuer identifier ISSU 8 bit 1) provided2. ELEKTRA operator identifier OPER 9 bit 1) provided3. ELEKTRA card identifier CARD 9+56 bit1) open4. Card delivery office identifier OFFI 9+12 bit free5. Reload device identifier RELD 9+15 bit1) free6. Validator identifier VALD 9+15 bit1) free7. Control device identifier CTRL 9+15 bit free8. Display device identifier DPLY 9+15 bit free9 Computer identifier COMP 9+ 12 bit free10. ELEKTRA location identifier LOCI 16 bit1) provided11. ELEKTRA service identifier SERV 24 bit1) provided12 ELEKTRA travel link identifier TRAV 32 bit1) provided13. ELEKTRA discount type code DISC 8 bit1) obligatory14. ELEKTRA discount document code (DDOC) 8 bit1) obligatory15. ELEKTRA fare product type code FARE 8 bit1) obligatory16. ELEKTRA settlements with publ. transp. APUB(LOCI) 10 bit1) obligatory

1)IDs placed also on the cards

26

Location Code Conversionin ELEKTRA Hungaria (LOCI)

on ELEKTRAcards

Location codes Name Operator Settlement Zone Associatiat. Linie GPS koord.(LOCI) (16 bit) (50 byte) (10 bit) (16 bit) (16 bit) (16 bit) (32 bit) (32+32 bit)

00001 Stops• (STOP) XY•

5999960000 Settlements

• (SETL)•

6349963500 Zones

• (ZONE)•

6499965000 Associations

• (ASSC)•

65499

In back office stored data

Assignement of stops to operators and areas

27

Principle of Travel Link Description

28

Description of a Pre-paid More-part Ticketwith Continuation

29

Requirement Areas at Establishing ofInteroperable Local Systems ELEKTRA

Checkingcommunication

Issuing datacontent

Discount types

Fare product types

Reloadingcommunication

Validationcommunication

Travel data

Device IDs

Data transfer

Data Centre

Card capabilities(card type, capacity,communication requirements)

Travel IDs

ELEKTRACard structure

Fare product contentData format

(Clearing Centre)Card CentreControl Centre

Card issuer IDsService operator IDs

Settlement/zone IDsStation/stop IDs

Service IDs

Data collection

obligatory

centrally managedlocally managed

30

Obligatory Requirements

� Uniform card standards and capabilities (DSC, PSC); alsocommunication

� Unique card structure (ELEKTRA)� Unified card data content (ELEKTRA); description of products� Unified card data formats (ELEKTRA)� Transaction Centre (by one self, or joined)� Card Centre (by one self, or joined)

6

31

Centrally Managed,Locally to Apply Requirements

� Card issuer IDs (centrally assigned)� Service operator IDs (centrally assigned)� Fare discount type IDs (centrally managed)� Settlement-, zone- association IDs (centrally managed)� Certified keyes� Unified message authentication code (MAC)� Clearing House Centre (only by multifunctional use)

32

Locally Managed by Common Rules

� Stop, station IDs (for own service area)� Service IDs (for own service area)� Fare product IDs (after local request centrally accepted

and managed)� Travel link IDs (for own service area)� Terminal device IDs (for own service area)� In the last group one should remind: local IDs +

operator ID result ELEKTRA IDs.

33

Most Important Legal Issues

� protection of personality rights at electronic transport cards� provision of discounted fares on chipcards� conditions of card issuing and electronic purse� rules of providing receipts� ability requirements for taxation and subsidising� managing of other functions and applications on the cards� bearing of the costs for “free of charge” travelers� management of lost cards� conditions for payment back from cards etc.

Most of the questions had been negotiated and agreed with theresponsible authorities and operable solutions could be found.

34

Card Centre Functions HandlingPersonalized Card Contents and Operations

35

Fare Systems and Fare Productsin Hungary (1)

� in local transport inside the city boundaries: flat rates� pass holders (adults, pupils/students, pensioners):

� general pass with monthly/yearly validity� modal pass with monthly/yearly validity� line pass with monthly/yearly validity

� ticket users:� single line tickets (general, short metro (<3 stops), long

metro)� ticket booklets (10, 20 tickets)� transfer tickets (general, short metro (<5 stops), long

metro)� 1,3,7 day tickets with general validity inside the city

boundary

36

Fare Systems and Fare Productsin Hungary (2)

� on border crossing lines around of Budapest (BKV):� suburban rail (HEV) lines: km-zone-fares outside the border� bus lines: flat fare along the lines� later in the association: linear zonal fares with fixed zones

� in interurban national passenger transport:� on bus lines: relational km-zonal tickets without interchange

� at boarding paid single tickets� monthly passes for adults, pupils/students

� on rail lines: relational tickets by km-zones withmore interchanges

� prepaid single tickets� monthly passes for adults, pupils/students

7

37

Card Data Structures andFare Product Capabilities

PSC64 DSC-L DSC-Dlocal singleline ticketlocal interchange ticket (< 60 min) with discountlocal short section ticket (? 3 further stops)local flat (regional zonal) stored value w. deductionlocal stored value deduction, rebatinglocal 1,3,7 day ticketinterurban single bus ticket (one part)interurban single rail ticket (one part)interurban single rail ticket (more parts)seasonal network passseasonal line/zonal passseassonal pass by usage countingseasonal local+association passparking ticketloyalty scheme

Fare product types Card type

Open fare product catalogue!

1

SUSTAINABLEAND LIVEABLE CITIES

- A VISION

Tamás FleischerInstitute for World Economics of the

Hungarian Academy of Scienceshttp://www.vki.hu/~tfleisch/

[email protected]

THIRD TECHNICAL WORKSHOPPreparation of the Green Paper of urban transport

„Public transport, intermodality and intelligent transport”Szentendre, Hungary, 7 March 2007

SUSTAINABILE AND LIVEABLE CITIES– A VISION

� The context:� Green Paper on Urban Transport� Third Technical Workshop on PT, I-MOD & INT TRA� Fourth Session on environmental performance & noise� A presentation before another two on air pollution & noise� How to get here to sustainable and liveable cities ?


� To get to sustainable and liveable cities (OUTLINE)� We have learned:� Not enough to focus but on emission issues� Not enough using technology but in hardware development� Not enough using IT but to solve old problems� There are no definite, optimal, ever-best solutions any more� Intelligent means: able to learn, adaptive, demand-sensitive� Three key elements to build a new context� Integrations (within and around transport issues)� Sustainability� Complexity

WE HAVE LEARNED

� Not enough to focus exclusively on emission issues� Transport accounts for a quarter of global CO2 emissions� Transport is the only industrial sector where emissions are

still growing – nearly doubled in last 15 years (CEE doubled)� All this happened when technological innovations

achieved good results in motor, fuel, vehicle etc. but trafficgrowth over-compensates all these improvements.

� First statement: if we focus too much extent to emissionmitigation, we can’t achieve even this direct target, notspeaking about further problems.

� Second statement: even if we invented a (not-possible)0-emission, 0-consumption, 0-cost car, the urbantransportation crisis wouldn’t be smaller but bigger

� Space is as much an emissions problem as other pollutions

WE HAVE LEARNED

� Not enough using technology but in hardwaredevelopment of the transport

� Traditionally new technologies were used in transport toimprove different hardware tools: better roads, bettervehicles, better fuel etc.

� Transport developers are always open to invent „faster,stronger, bigger” tools (tanker, airplane, motorway, TGVetc.), but slower in realising, if the direction has to bechanged because the transport begins to be blocked

� My statement: the new challenge is to use the newtechnology in better organisation and regulation of traffic,and promoting not more but less motorised traffic.I call that as using info-technology to improve the softwareof the transport rather than just bring hardware solutions.

WE HAVE LEARNED

� Not enough using information technology (IT) just tosolve old problems

� New inventions frequently are used for a long time to solveold problems by them, and it needs further innovations torealise how the new technology can change the traditionalsectorial solutions as well.

� Statement: the real involvement of IT into transportarrives, when genuine new transport solutions aregenerated with the new technology.

2

WE HAVE LEARNED

� There are no definite, optimal, best solutions any more� There is not any more a „ready” complete definite state of

the future that could be the target of our plans.� We do not even know to what situation we have to adjust

our activity in a 10-20 etc. years perspective (when ourconstructions, infrastructures will all operate).

� Statement: the only certain point is the existence of thechange, and that our systems have to be ready to adaptthemselves to these changes.

WE HAVE LEARNED

� ‘Intelligent’ means: adaptive, demand-sensitive, able tolearn (from the past and present, from others and from ownexperiences)

� When we speak on intelligent transport systems, a mainissue must be the ability of these systems to adjustthemselves to the changing environment, to the changingcircumstances.

� Statement: a most general objective have to be thepreparation of future systems (be they transport systems orcities or others) for a continuous adaptive change: wherethey are able to be adapted to a new environment, and stillable to reserve their own functions.

� Key elements of this new context areintegration, sustainability and complexity

KEY ELEMENTS TO BUILD A NEW CONTEXT

� Integrations (within and around transport issues)� If we look at our Background paper p.4. ‘Intelligent

transport systems’, ‘Issues’; - we find almost all suggestedtools and policies as being different kind of integrations.

� modal integration (or co-modality)spatial integration (or urban/interurban interface, cross-border issues) [I would add regional transport alliances]technical integration (or interoperability)information integration (or satellite based and travelinformation)resource integration (or PPP-s)

� [I would add some other integrations =>]


� Integrations (within and around transport issues)� I would add: better embedding of transport:

policy integration (transport with urban policy, withregional policy etc.),social integration: social embedding of decision processes,enforcing user’s interests,evaluation integration: involvement of evaluations intodevelopment processes

� How can we operationise these integrations in urban area- integration vs. dominant transport modes,- the role of public space

INTEGRATION VS MODAL DOMINATION

Shift in the role ofdifferent modes.The new technologytime-to-time createda new dominanttransport mode

Source: Nakicenovic,Nebojsa (1888)Dynamics of changeand long waves.IIASA

INTEGRATION VS MODAL DOMINATION

� Pre-industrialperiod:the constructionof canals

� Industrialperiod:the victory ofrails

� Modernityperiod:the dominance ofcars.

� ???

3

� Pre-industrial period: the construction of canals

� Industrial period: the victory of rails

� Modernity period: the dominance of cars

� ???.

� Post-modernity period: „everything goes”

� There is no dominant transport mode

� Integrations, co-operations, alliances

� THIS IS AN IMPORTANT BASIS OF THE VISION.

INTEGRATION VS. MODAL DOMINATION THE ROLE OF PUBLIC SPACE

� Integrations - the role of public space� Metaphor of Lewis Mumford (The City in History): The

city is Shelter, Fortress and Temple (physical, social andspiritual protection)

� If we see the public space rather than the houses,the city is first of all a place of exchanges:Market, Forum, Promenade;(exchange of goods, exchange of ideas and‘exchange’ /meeting point/ of people)

� Such kind of meeting point functions of the city are to beserved in a liveable urban area through an integratedapproach.

THE ROLE OF PUBLIC SPACES

� Integrations (within and around transport issues)� The case of Copenhagen (Gehl, Jan – Gemzoe, Lars (2000) New

City Spaces. Danish Architectural Press, Copenhagen)� The more roads you build, the more car traffic you attract.

Similarly: the more public space you build, the morepedestrians you can attract.


� Sustainability� First statement: sustainability is a temporal and a spatial

issue in the same time.� Second statement: environmental, social and economic

issues are not of equal importance within sustainableapproach, but the two latters are subordinated to theenvironmental constraints.

� Third statement: there are external conditions ofsustainability (touches the resource use and the pollutions)and also are there internal conditions: a system have to beable to react on feedbacks arriving from the environmentand change its operation by that signals.

ON SUSTAINABILITY APPROACH

� UN Bruntland report (Our Common Future 1987)definition: „development, that meet the needs of the currentgeneration without compromising the ability of futuregenerations to meet their own needs ”

� Inter-generational solidarity

� Spatial extension – intra-generational solidarity / defencedevelopment, that meet the needs of those living herewithout compromising the ability of those living elsewhereto meet their own needs.

� „Infrastructure Networks in Central Europe and the EU Enlargement”http://www.vki.hu/workingpapers/wp-139.pdf

� „Space of places” must be protected from „space of flows”Manuel Castells (1996) The Rise of the Network Society Blackwell


� The „three potatoes”

� Weak sustainability: the sum of the (environmental, social,economical) capital should not be decreased

ENVIRONMENT

SOCIETY

ECONOMY

4

� The „three potatoes”in systemic order

� Strong sustainability:the environmentalconstraints are to berespected in itself

� We can have effect on the ‘economy’ or the ‘society’.There are external and internal conditions of thesustainability of these latter systems.


ENVIRONMENT

SOCIETY

ECONOMY

� External conditions of sustainability: (1) the inputshould not extend the rate of regeneration of sources;(2) the output should not extend the absorption capacity ofnature; (+ the use of non-renewables running out by the rate of theirsubstitutability with renewables). (Herman Daly)

� Internal (system-operational) conditions ofsustainability: the system have to be sensitive on externalconditions, its operation should respect that constraints,and there should exist self-regulating internal subsystemsfor that kind of operation.

� The fulfilment of the internal conditions of sustainabilitydemand new-type transport / urban expertise



� Complexity� What the theory of complex interacting systems can tell us

about the [sustainable] urban fabric.� Salingaros, Nikos A (2000) Complexity and Urban Coherence.

Journal of Urban Design, Vol. 5. pp.291-316

� City is a network of topologically deformable paths. Acoherent city must be „able to follow bending, extension,and compression of paths without tearing. In order to dothis, the urban fabric must be strongly connected to thesmallest scale, and loosely connected on the largest scale.”

� Eight rules of Salingaros for assembling components of acity into a coherent whole.

COMPLEXITY:THE EIGHT RULES OF THE COHERENT CITY

� (1) Strongly coupled elements of the same scale form amodule

� (2) Similar elements do not couple. A critical diversity ofdifferent element is needed.

� (3) Modules couple with their boundary elements, notwith internal elements

� (4) Interactions are strongest on the smallest scale andweak on the largest scale

� Salingaros, Nikos A (2000) Complexity and Urban Coherence. Journal ofUrban Design, (5) 291-316

COMPLEXITY:THE EIGHT RULES OF THE COHERENT CITY

� (5) Long-range forces create the large scale from well-defined structure of the smallest scales.

� (6) System’s components assemble progressively fromsmall to large

� (7) Elements and modules on different scales do notdepend on each other in a symmetric manner: a higherscale requires all lower scales but not vice versa.

� (8) A coherent system cannot be completely decomposedinto constituent parts.

� Salingaros, Nikos A (2000) Complexity and Urban Coherence. Journal ofUrban Design, (5) 291-316


� We have learned:� Not enough to focus on emission issues, listen to space pollution!� Use new technology for software development too!� Instead of solving old problems use IT to reformulate problems� Instead of definite solutions look for adaptability and flexibility� Intelligent systems can learn, and adapt their operation to needs� Three key elements to build a new context� Integrations – within the transport there is no more dominant

mode; transport as a whole is embedded into wider policies andurban public space approach.

� Sustainability – the space of places needs protection against thespace of flows (Manuel Castells)

� Complexity – by the geometry and modul structure of a coherentcity: the basis is the strongly coupled local fabric

5

SUSTAINABLEAND LIVEABLE CITIES

- A VISIONTamás Fleischer

Institute for World Economicsof the Hungarian Academy of Sciences

http://www.vki.hu/~tfleisch/ [email protected]

THIRD TECHNICAL WORKSHOPPreparation of the Green Paper of urban transport

„Public transport, intermodality and intelligent transport”Szentendre, Hungary, 7 March 2007

THANKS FOR YOURKIND ATTENTION !

� Steps objecting to moderate the quantity of the transport

� Steps for decreasing the quantity of the motorised traffic

� Change in the territorial distribution of the transport

� Change in the temporal distribution of the transport

� Change in the modal structure of the transport

� Decreasing the pollution emission / resource use of thetransport

� Steps helping the social embedding of the transport

� Respect, maintenance, completing, renowing the existingobjects.

DETERMINING STRATEGIC FOCUS

1

Urban Air Quality: Problems and Solutions

Nina RenshawUrban Transport, 3rd Technical Workshop7 March 2007

www.transportenvironment.org

T&E: Europe’s umbrella NGO for sustainable transport

Members in:� Austria� Belgium� Czech Republic� Denmark� Estonia� France� Germany� Greece� Hungary� Italy

� Netherlands� Norway� Poland� Portugal� Romania� Russia� Spain� Sweden� Switzerland� UK

+ Russia!


Contents

� Urban air quality – the problem

� Solutions at EU level

� Solutions at national level

� Solutions at urban level

� Conclusions

Urban air quality – the problem


Air quality and health

� Air pollution is the main cause ofenvironment-related diseases in Europe

� Cardiovascular and respiratory problems� 20 million Europeans a day suffer from respiratory

problems (EEA 2005)� Current air pollution concentrations = 370 000

premature deaths per year & > 100 000 serioushospital admissions

� Annual cost of health impacts (PM & Ozone) tosociety estimated between €276-€790 billion =

3-9% of the EU25 GDP


Air quality and health

� Harmful air pollutants to be primarilyaddressed for health & environment:� Particles (PM10, PM2.5) – dominate

health impacts of air pollution� Sulphur dioxide (SO2)� Nitrogen oxides (NOx – NO2)� Volatile organic compounds (VOCs)� Ammonia (NH3)� Ozone

2


CALCULATED transport air emissions down …

Cal

cula

ted

tren

dsin

tran

spor

tem

issi

ons

inE

EA

mem

ber

coun

trie

s(s

ourc

eE

EA

)www.transportenvironment.org

But MEASURED air pollution along roads constant

Mea

sure

dav

erag

ean

nual

conc

entr

atio

nsal

ong

busy

road

sin

Vie

nna,

Bru

ssel

s,P

ragu

e,H

elsi

nki,

Par

is,

Ber

lin,A

then

s,K

rako

w,

Bra

tisla

va,S

tock

holm

and

Lond

on(s

ourc

eE

EA

)www.transportenvironment.org

Explanation of differences

� Increased proportion NO2/NOx

� Diesel cars fail on emissions inurban areas and models do not takethat into account

Solutions at EU level


Air quality legislation - political developments

� Air quality limits currently underdiscussion

� Key issues:� PM2.5 annual limit (character & values)� PM10 daily limits (#days, and derogations)� PM10 annual limit

� EP second reading (+ conciliation ?)


Euro standards: not as effective as they seem…

3


… and Euro 5/6 for cars still way off US levels

0

50

100

150

200

250

US

bin

8

US

bin

7

US

bin

6

US

bin

5

US

bin

4

US

bin

3

US

bin

2

US

bin

1

Eur

o4

Eur

o5

Eur

o6

NO

xem

issi

on

stan

dar

din

mg

/km

as of2010

as of2015

US Tier 2standards,as of 2007


Coming up in 2007

� Euro VI standards for lorries� Important source of urban air pollution

� Standards for ship engines andfuels?� Need fuel quality directive and� NOx standards for ships

� EU funds: Trans-European networkvs. Public transport?

Solutions at national level


Some examples of national policies

� Incentives for particle filters for newcars, vans, buses and lorries andretrofitting (NL, DK, AT)

� Circulation taxes & infrastructurecharging based on Euro emissionsclasses (DE)

� Differentiate seaport charges onbasis of NOx emission of shipengine (SW)

Solutions at local / regional level


Urban charging: two successesLondon

17 February 2003One third less carsMore buses, metros, bikes, taxis16% lower air emissionsBusiness impact negligibleMayor re-elected

Stockholm3 January 20057 month trial, then referendum20% less trafficInner city emissions cut by 14%Much faster deliveries

4


Low Emission Zones

� In place:� Amsterdam� Stockholm, Malmo, Gothenburg, Lund� Lombardia� Athens

� Planned:� Munich (October 2007)� London (February 2008)� Berlin (2008)� The Netherlands (allowed from April 2007)� Denmark (allowed from July 2008).


80 km/h zones (NL)

Tra

nspo

rtem

issi

onN

Ox:

-15

–20

%.

Tra

nspo

rtem

issi

onP

M10

:-25

–30

%.

Impr

ovem

ento

ftot

alai

rqu

ality

Ove

rsch

ie.

NO

2:7%

,Pm

10:4

%(r

athe

rlo

wdu

eto

back

grou

ndco

ncen

trat

ions

)


And of course…� Local speed limits in urban areas and

main roads (30km/h)� Bristol, London, Berlin, Brussels, Rotterdam

� More & cleaner public transport:� Bristol, Graz, Copenhagen, London, Milan,

Munich, Stockholm, Riga, Rome, Vienna,Düsseldorf, Brussels.

� Green public procurement, retrofitting buses

� Promotion of cycling: win-win for health!� Bristol, Graz, Copenhagen, London, Berlin,

Brussels, Stockholm, Riga, Vienna, Warsaw.


Conclusions

� Emission models are too optimistic– ‘cycle beating’ is not taken intoaccount

� Many measures available at all levels� Action at ALL LEVELS is indispensable� Some Member States have started

implementation

Thank you !

For more information


1

Noise from transport in cities:problems and solutions

M. Jaecker-CueppersMember of the CALM team

Umweltbundesamt, Dessau, [email protected]

Third Technical Workshop"Public transport, intermodality and

intelligent transport"Szentendre, Hungary, 7 March 2007

Workshop Szentendre7 March 2007

M. Jaecker-Cueppers UBA 2

Contents

• Noise Problems from Urban Transport– Impacts– Responses

• Solutions– Integrated approach needed– Strategies

• Conclusions



Noise Problems from Urban Transport: Impacts

• High impairments– exposures up to 80/75 dB(A) daytime/nighttime– compare WHO Guidelines for residential areas 55/45 dB(A)– ∆∆∆∆L = 25 -30 dB(A) ≡ traffic volume reduction to 0.3 or 0.1 %– noise effects:

• increase of heart attack risks (levels above 65/55)• annoyance

– noise peculiarity: higher sensivity during nighttime (sleepprotection)⇒⇒⇒⇒ no shift of traffic to nighttime period !

• Main source:– road traffic:

D: 70 % of the population with high daytime exposure(> 65 dB(A)) live along major urban roads



Noise Problems from Urban Transport: Responses

• Policy: noise of low priority(despite the view of the citizens; surveys D: similarconcern versus road traffic noise and air pollution)

• Insufficient EU and MS legislation:– in general no noise reception limits for existing

infrastructures– EU emission regulations of low efficiency (see below)– EU reception regulation (Environmental noise Directive END

of 2002):• EU sets no compulsory limits• concentration on hot spots

⇒not much exposure reduction in Europe in the lastdecades; reductions for the „hot spots“ to beexpected



Solutions: Integrated Approach Needed

• High noise reductions needed:⇒⇒⇒⇒ in general a mix of measures required⇒⇒⇒⇒ integration of measures and instruments into an optimal (cost-

effective) strategy

• Shared responsibility and competence of variousstakeholders:– EU, Member States MS, regional and local authorities RA, LA,– transport infrastructure and service operators INF, OP– manufacturers MAN– citizens (CIT: as polluters and exposed) and NGOs

• Noise reduction among the targets of sustainablemobility(safety, reduction of air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions,area and resource consumption, urban quality etc)⇒⇒⇒⇒ common approach: minimising traffic



Solutions: Ranking of Strategies in UrbanNoise Protection

• Strategies:– traffic avoidance– shift to low noise emission sources– reduction of the emissions– measures in the sound propagation path

• increase of distances between source and receiver• shielding (barriers etc)• increase of sound absorption• prevention of reflections

– measures at the receiver• sound insulation (windows)• orientation of rooms according to their sensivity• shielding through building parts

2



Traffic Avoidance : Short Distance City

• aim: enabling „zero emission mobility“ by walkingand cycling

• via urban land use planning(mixture of use, decentralisation, condensation)(LA, RA, legal framework: MS)

• via promotion of the „pedestrian and bicycle friendlytown“ (LA, legal framework: MS):

– increasing safety (speed reduction of motorised traffic) andperformance (privileged and spacious networks)

– combined transport systems (e. g. bike and ride with publictransport)



Traffic Avoidance : Pricing Instruments

• Reflecting infrastructure and external costs oftransport (LA, MS, EU);

• instruments:– petrolium tax (mileage-related) (MS)– motor vehicle tax (can be emission-related) (MS)– road pricing (LA, e.g.. London congestion charge)– lorry toll (mileage-related, (EU), MS; Germany, Switzerland)– parking fees (LA)– reduction of subsidies (EU, MS, LA)



Traffic Avoidance : Traffic Management

• parking guiding systems (LA)• freight logistics (LA, OP)• traffic restrictions (LA): e.g. pedestrian zones, lorry

bans (nighttime)(no real traffic avoidance if total mileage is not reduced)



Traffic Avoidance: Change of Life Style

• promotion of a life style with low (motorised) travelintensity– car free residential areas (LA)– car sharing (LA)– campaigns (LA, MS, EU)



Shift to Low Noise Emission Sources 1

• promotion of low noise versions within vehiclecategories via incentives (better operational conditions,lower charges)(examples low noise trucks: Heidelberg, Austria)(LA, legal framework: MS, EU)

• modal shift :– innerurban cars ⇒⇒⇒⇒ public transport (very efficient: ⇒⇒⇒⇒ subways)– long(?)-distance road and air transport ⇒⇒⇒⇒ rail, ship (freight)

• requires comparison of specific emissions or better:specific impairments of the modes (with respect totransport performance [Person-km, ton-km]):specific emissions from rail transport (freight, trams) can be higherthan those from the analagous road mode



Shift to Low Noise Emission Sources 2

• Instruments:– land use planning (density, public transport lines as centers of

urban development) (LA, RA)– freight logistics (connections to rail network) (INF, OP)– economic instruments (rail cards, jobtickets)– privileging public transport (bus lanes, priority at traffic lights)

(LA)– promotion of combined transport (MS)– improving the service of public transport

(OP, INF, LA; legal framework: MS, EU))(frequency, density of stops, punctuality)

– public relations , information (OP, LA)

3



Reduction of the Noise Emissions: TechnicalMeasures

• Stakeholders: (MAN, OP, INF; legal framework: EU, MS ):– to be addressed: vehicles and infrastructure (rolling noise)– adaption to the specific urban situations („city mode“ for

vehicles)

• Instruments:– noise emission regulations (vehicles and infrastructure) (EU, MS)

(vehicles 1995; tyres: inefficient; trams: no regulation)– incentives for low noise products and procedures

• exemptions from operational restrictions (trucks – see Heidelberg)(MS, LA)

• noise emission-related infrastructure charges (EU, MS, INF: airports)

– information on low noise products (eco labels) (EU, MS)– public procurement of low noise vehicles (MS, LA)– construction of low noise surfaces (INF, LA)



Reduction of the Emissions: Traffic Calming

• Low noise driving behaviour: (LA, CIT)– speed limit reduction (see figure below)– street design: enforcing low noise driving– training, education and control of drivers (low noise driving ≡≡≡≡

fuel saving) (MS,LA, OP, police (control))

„Noise Protection“

Nighttime Speed limit 30 km/h in Berlin on main road(Schildhornstraße)



Conclusions

• Integration of noise reduction into a strategy forsustainable mobility required

• EU plays an important role in urban transport noiseabatement, e. g. :– regulations (noise emission and reception limits according

to the state of art resp. noise effects)– harmonisation of assessment methods and definitions (eco-

labbelling)– legal framework for pricing instruments– information (networks, good practice guidelines,

campaigns)– promoting mobility and noise related research (noise

effects, technology etc)

technical workshop intermodality mom 070307 v1 · traveller security and anti -terrorism security...

Documents