ENCUENTRO INTERNACIONAL. LA CIUDAD HISTÓRICA ACTUAL CONFERENCIA 8 19 de agosto de 2004

Transcription

1 ENCUENTRO INTERNACIONAL. LA CIUDAD HISTÓRICA ACTUAL CONFERENCIA 8 19 de agosto de 2004 Título: Situación y desarrollo del tráfico en [ciudades de] Europa. Ponente: Michael Meschik (Austria) Especialista en transporte en ciudades europeas. CASA DE LA CIUDAD Porfirio Díaz #115 Esq. Morelos. Centro Histórico Oaxaca, Oax. tel: (951) /fax:(951)

2 Walking, Cycling and Public Transport - Sustainable Traffic Modes in European Cities Michael Meschik Institute for Transport Studies Universität für Bodenkultur Wien michael.meschik@boku.ac.at La Ciudad Histórica Actual, Oaxaca, August 19,

3 Austria in the heart of Europe 3

4 Three Austrian Cities and their population Vienna 1.55 million Salzburg 143,000 Graz 226,000 4

5 Contents (Road) Traffic situation and developments Sustainability Examples of promotion - environmental - social - economic - walking - cycling - public transport (p.t.) 5

6 Development and prognosis of the car ownership rate: Austria Saturation estimated r ep sr a C

7 A Vicious Circle is building up Congestion Increasing volumes of individual motorized traffic Construction of new roads Urban sprawl 7

8 Trends in local traffic: City of Salzburg workday traffic gness ap 000, p.t. 20 % NMT 44 % 44 % 40 % 36 % MIT % 18 % 42 % 40 %

9 Trends in source and destination traffic into and out of the City of Salzburg, workday traffic ness ap 000, % MIV 68 % ÖV NMV 28 % 4% % 21 % 3% 24 % 3%

10 Different traffic mode use: Austria vs. USA Austria USA

11 Developments in European cities Motorisation increased in the cities and so increased congestion Many cities were made car-friendly, pedestrians and cyclists lost urban space, p.t. got stuck in congestion Congestion still increased, cities suffer from environmental problems Road-space is being reallocated from cars to pedestrians, bicycles and public transport 11

12 All the others are idiots 12

13 Modal-split in Vienna, recent development and objectives of the transport masterplan 60% 50% % of trips MOTORISED TRAFFIC 40% 37% 37% 30% 37% 33%PUBLIC TRANSPORT 35% 29% 23% WALKING 20% 10% 1% BICYCLE 3% 36% 41% 27% 26% 25% 3% 7% 0%

14 Dynamic development of individual motorized traffic and objectives for the modal-split in Vienna Concrete measures Support of public transport and non-motorised modes 50% 40% 37 % 37 % Trend 42 % 36 % 30% goal 25 % Permanent pressure by: Motorization Urban sprawl Ageing society 20% 10% 0%

15 Modal-split differs from city to city walking bicycle individual motorized transport public transport 15

16 Possible alternative for cities Motorisation increased in the cities, consequently increased congestion Make the cities pedestrian- and bicyclefriendly, improve public transport Allow access with cars and lorries but do not give them priority Results: less congestion, better living conditions, fewer environmental problems and less money spent in terms of the national economy 16

17 Two hypotheses for inner-city traffic Accessibility with cars and lorries is vital for a city, but cars should not have priority in the city centre. Inner-city passenger-traffic can be served best with a combination of p.t. and non-motorised modes. The reasons: Public transport and non-motorized modes have advantages in most fields of sustainability, such as space requirements, environmental impacts, traffic safety, social chances, costs per trip etc. 17

18 Sustainability Current definitions of sustainability: World Commission on Employment & Development (1987) (Brundtland-Report): Our Common Future, Oxford University Press Sustainable development (SD) means to satisfy the needs of the current generations keeping options open for future generations and their needs. 18

19 Three aspects of sustainability 19

20 Objectives for sustainable development (exemplary) Ecology Social society Economy Air pollutants Appropriate accessibility guaranteed Appropriate accessibility for shops and businesses guaranteed Noise pollution Land consumption Soil sealing Protection of atmosphere Energy consumption Traffic safety Social acceptability of individual mobility costs Fulfilment of land use goals Internalising of external transport costs for transport users and goods transport Well-balanced financing of transport infrastructure 20

21 Ecological Indicators of Transport Modes Space Energy consumption CO2 NOx VOC CO Air pollution Induced accident risk 21

22 Cycling saves resources and reduces pollution Capacity of a 3.5 metre wide lane [persons per hour] 22

23 Transport is moving away from sustainability CO2 emissions in transport 23

24 Walking, cycling and public transport improve the quality of life and social chances These modes affect the city environment much less than cars. Cycling and walking do not disturb the neighbourhoods, which become quiet and liveable. Traffic-calmed areas are now the most expensive housing areas. Non-motorised traffic and p.t. usually equal short trips. - This also necessitates the appropriate infrastructure like shops, markets, restaurants etc. right around the corner. People who do not exercise (walk, cycle etc.) develop health problems (obesity, heart attacks, diabetes). Many people cannot drive or afford a car. They depend on structures which necessitate only short trips to reach everything needed for the daily life routine. This social dimension of sustainability is the one that is often neglected. 24

25 Objectives of the European project TRANSECON Identification and exploration of quantitative and qualitative direct and indirect effects and impacts of urban transport infrastructure Focus on - long term effects and impacts, - large scale infrastructure investments, - public transport infrastructure - reference case: bicycle infrastructure Analysis of 13 realized cases in European cities 25

26 The costs: The European case study TRANSECON Bicycle Delft Metro Tyne and Wear Stuttgart Zurich S-Bahn (Suburban Rail) Athens Brussels Helsinki Lyon Madrid Vienna Manchester Bratislava Valencia Tram or Trolleybus 26

27 89,7 71,4 58,6 Bicycle Metro st le St ut tg ar Zu t ric h 7,2 S-Bahn 1,1 1,6 Br at M isla v an ch a es Va ter le nc ia 11,1 ca 4,8 0, ,8 Ne w 20 Br us se He ls lsi nk i Ly o M n ad rid Vi en na De l ft r aey r ep or ue Efficiency indicator: Average Investment per additional bicycle or public transport trip per year Tram 27

28 Cost-efficiency of infrastructure per newly generated trip per trip 0.91 Pedestrian and bicycle Car and PT

29 Cost recovery of trip-costs in Austria Included: Infrastructure (current value), external accident costs, environmental costs and revenues car Total revenues to costs ratio % all motorized vehicles (car, bus, lorry) 2000 p.t. (without railways) % railways (pass.+ goods) % 32 % 29

30 How much would one litre of fuel cost, if (rough estimation) (Fuel price now: < 1,00 Euro / litre) 4,6 USD per Gallon motorized individual traffic had the same trip cost recovery as public transport (64%)? (= same terms of competition from the national economic view) 1,90 Euro / litre 8,8 USD per Gallon motorized individual traffic had full revenue to cost ratio (100%)? 2,60 Euro / litre 12 USD per Gallon 30

31 What can be done to promote sustainable modes of city transport? Hardware : Appropriate infrastructure improves the conditions for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport; Cars and the other modes compete for the same road space. Transport policy decides. Software : Consistent transport policy over longer time; The acceptance of transport measures in Europe is strongly dependent on participation processes. 31

32 Participation process Integration of all transport modes. Less separation caused by traffic. Strict adherence to threshold values of pollutants. Priority for PT. Promotion of cycling. Safe ways to school. n an Pl er 32

33 The HARDWARE choosing the infrastructure To provide the right infrastructure, the following must be considered: (1) volumes of motorised traffic (2) speed of the motorists (3) volumes of pedestrians, cyclists (4) width of the street (5) lots of other criteria 33

34 Planning rules The general rules (in cities) are: SAME ROAD-SPACE for bicycle and car at low speeds and low traffic volumes SEPARATE bicycle and car at high speeds and high traffic volumes SEPARATE pedestrian and car SEPARATE bicycle and pedestrian (except low volumes) 34

35 Required width [metres] Width of pedestrian pavements depending on pedestrian volumes and level of service 4,0 Good Level of Service 3,5 3,0 alk w od Go 2,5 ab t p e Acc in ons i t i ond c g a lk w le in ns o i t di n o gc lkin a w d e rict t s Re 2.02,0 m on c g ns o i t di Not recommended poor level of service 1,5 1, Number of pedestrians per hour 35

36 How do pedestrians and cyclists cross the road? 36

37 Helping pedestrians and cyclists to cross the street Traffic island Speed humps pavement level 3 cm or smaller street level raised street level 8-10 cm 4 m or 8 m 37

38 separated from car traffic by construction SEPARATING Cycle path Cycle lane Cyclists (1) First: cyclists on the road, separated by road markings only, lane exclusively for cyclists which cycling facilities are common? Multi-purpose lane SHARE THE ROAD like cycle lane, but lorries are also allowed to use it 30-kph zone cyclists and cars share the road Bicycle Parked car Driving car 38

39 Cyclists (2): The planning principle ADTV [Veh/day] SEPARATING MIXING or SEPARATING Cycle lanes or Cycle paths Mixed traffic, Multi purpose lanes, Cycle lanes or Cycle paths MIXING Cycle paths only Mixed traffic or Multi purpose lanes V85 [km/h] 39

40 Cycling on the road safe in 30-kph zones 40

41 EXAMPLE: Graz as a 30kph zone Based on three columns: - Area-wide 30 kph zone except on main arterial roads - Public-awareness-raising campaigns - Enforcement of speed limits Road network of Graz priority streets 50 kph 229 km 23% residential street 30 kph 775 km 77% total 1004 km 100% 41

42 30 kph zones in the city of Graz All roads except main arterials 42

43 Citizen s opinions two years after implementation of 30-kph zones in Graz Future measures should be: INCREASE in APPROVAL Definitely Do not care No Traffic calming Promotion of cycling Promotion of walking Restrictions of car traffic 43

44 What are the citizens saying? The bicycle should be given priority even in case of conflict with car traffic YES NO 44

45 Bicycle and public transport Bike & ride Coming to the station by bicycle (bike & ride) enlarges the catchment area by the factor 36 compared with walking 0,79 km² 28,3 km² 45

46 Lessons learnt from Transecon project: project efficiency related to demand and network length Transecon p.t. research found the following: - p.t. on the surface more efficient than underground tram or light rail transit m.e.t. heavy rail system improvement of existing line m.e.t. total new line network completion and enlargement m.e.t. single line non-motorised transport investment generally efficient Cycle lanes (low investment) have the highest improvement of sustainability goals per Euro invested. The results are mainly related to social benefits. 46

47 More lessons learnt: demand effects Accompanying measures for p.t. infrastructure investments increase p.t. demand & use significantly: e.g. park-and-ride, bike-and-ride, information & marketing, integrated fare-, ticket-, service-, timetable-, network system etc. Sustainable long-term decrease of car demand caused by p.t. infrastructure investment must be supported by restrictive car-policy measures (push-and-pull strategy): e.g. parking fees, reduction of lane capacity and parking facilities, access restrictions, road or congestion pricing 47

48 Be aware of killer phrases such as: Waiting for (technical) solutions that work wonders Trying to be everyone s darling Traffic calming and good accessibility of the city centre with p.t. ruins shops & businesses 48

49 Trend development and desirable future Measures must be implemented to reach a desirable future C Dev urrent elop men t Vision of a Desirable Future Cur Situ rent atio n De Tre ve nd lop me nt 49

50 Conclusions: Examples in Europe show that: Increase in car use is no natural law ; Transport policy has to guide traffic developments towards more sustainability in the environmentally, economic and social sector; Saving of resources will become even more important; Some communities have managed to preserve the city centres and provide good quality of life. 50

51 When you take the cars 51

52 from the streets, lots of space will be won 52

53 so you can stand up and walk 53

54 or use bicycles 54

55 or take the bus 55

56 Gracias por su atención Thank you for your attention 56