Stage 1 Mobility

8/2/2019 Stage 1 Mobility

1/31

Tania _ A0069234

Vaishnavi _ A0086249

Deepshi _ A0094268

Elaheh _ A0082614Moses _ A0092270

M O B I L I T Y


2/31

1. Introduction

Mobility v/s Accessibility

2. Parameters determining public transport

usage

3. Modal share of public v/s private transport

Modal share comparison- Public v/s

private4. Singapore

Statistics

Transport Map

Mobility Snapshot

Mobility Analysis

5. Paris

Statistics

Transport Map

Mobility Snapshot

Mobility Analysis

6. Tokyo

Statistics

Transport Map

Mobility Snapshot

Mobility Nnalysis

7. Hong Kong

Statistics Transport Map

Mobility Snapshot

Mobility Analysis

8. Curitiba

Statistics

Transport Map

Mobility Snapshot

Mobility Analysis

9. Benchmarking for public transport usage10. Conclusion

CONTENTS


3/31

Introduction1

MOBILITY

V/S

ACCESSIBILITY

Mobility

Movement of people and goods from place to place

Mode: How you get there?Speed: How fast?

Accessibility (Can be understood as micro mobility)

Easily approached, entered or obtainable

Where can you go?

What can you get to?

Cost

Micro MobilityMacro Mobility

A B A A B B

Everyone is different

To some accessibility is being able to drive to 5

different golf courses.Others simply want only their 1 favorite local pub

How do you compare the accessibility of

airplanes to buses?

Thats not an apples to apples comparison

Do you define accessibility by distance?

Too limiting, but it gets technical

Accessibility

Mobility

Car

AirplaneBus

Subway


4/31

Mobility v/s Accessibility1a

Different types of public transport

provide different levels of access and

different levels of mobility

A local bus would have great access but isunlikely to be particularly quick especiallyif it meanders around local streets .

A High-Speed Railway line would providetremendous mobility, but is likely to have

poor access as generally a city wouldhave only one or two High-Speed RailStations to ensure trains dont get sloweddown too much by having to stop .

Just as minor arterial routes, majorarterials and motorways, a good publictransport network will have local services

(high accessibility, lower mobility), qualitytransit (medium accessibility, mediummobility) and rapid transit (loweraccessibility, higher mobility). Just as onedrives from a minor arterial onto themotorway, one would transfer from a localfeeder bus onto a rapid rail system.

As access gets higher, mobility reduces and the vice

versa leading to the heirarchy of roads so that access

& mobility is provided when needed .

FREEWAY

EXPRESSWAY

MAJOR ARTERIAL

MINOR ARTERIAL

COLLECTOR

LOCAL ROADS

CUL-DE-SAC


5/31

POLICIES

Urban densityMohering effect

Urban density plays an important role in the use of public transport as increase in density,increases in the frequency which in turnwould favour the use of public transport.

Compactness in developmentcompact city planningMixed use development minimizes the travel distances Operational strategyPublic private operational strategy promotes better quality of public transport system which therefore promotes the use of publictransport

Limiting private car ownershipLimiting private vehicle ownership by capping the number of private car user per month , cap on available parking spaces ,electronicroad pricing etc promotes use of public transport.

TRAVEL TIMEThe urban transit time is 45 minutes. Hence adhering to this time through different modes of transport would promote usage ofpublic transport .

AFFORDABALITYAffordable fares for public transport

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORT SYSTEMSystems like display of Bus arrival timing etc

Parameters determining the usage of public transport2


6/31

MODAL SHARE OF PUBLIC & PRIVATE TRANSPORT3

Reference: Land Transport Authority (Singapore) Publications: Journey Sharing Urban Transport Solutions, November 2011, p60-70

Passenger transport mode share refers to the percentage of passenger journeys or trips by the main

mode of transport and is typically reported through travel surveys.

Comparing passenger transport mode share across different cities is a challenging task. As travel surveys are typically conductedfor long-term strategic planning purpose, such surveys are not conducted frequently and detailed reports are not always published.The situation is further complicated as the surveys are often commissioned by local governments.

The geographical areas covered, sampling and interviewing techniques, questionnaire and stratification methods deployed bytravel surveys vary greatly in different countries. For example, the definition for a pedestrian trip or a public transport trip may bedifferent in different countries.

In cities like Hong Kong, mode share is based on the number of boardings by mode of transport (or journey stages).

In most cities, however, mode share is reported on the basis of the number of journeys, which may consist of a series ofboardings on different modes of transport and the main mode is reported as the transport mode.

Mode share is affected by household incomes, land use patterns, and many other economic and social factors. Therefore, the

figures may not be directly comparable.

They should be analysed together with the historical, social and economic situation of the city. The mode share information ofsome major metropolitan cities in the world is presented. They include the traditionally advanced cities (e.g. Paris and Tokyo),newly developed cities (e.g. Hong Kong), cities often cited in transport innovations or sustainable transport surveys (e.g.Curitiba).


7/31

Singapore

MRT/BUS : CARS

60:40

Paris

MRT/BUS : CARS

66:34

Tokyo

MRT/BUS : CARS

80:20

Hong Kong

MRT/BUS : CARS

88:12

Modal share comparison- PUBLIC & PRIVATE3a

Reference: Land Transport Authority (Singapore) Publications: Journey Sharing Urban Transport Solutions, November 2011, p60-70

Curitiba

MRT/BUS : CARS

62:38

Population: 1.9 million

Land area: 430 km2

Mode share

Based on the number of journeys by main mode of

transport. It includes allmodes for all purposes. Masstransit constitutes 45% of alljourneys.

Data Sources:

ICLEI EcoMobility CaseCuritiba, Brazil - A model oftransit oriented planning


Land area: 1,104 km2

Mode share

Based on the number ofboardings by mode of

transport. It includes onlymotorised modes for allpurposes. Mass transitconstitutes 80% of allboardings.

Data Sources:

Hong Kong in Figures 2011Travel CharacteristicsSurvey 2002, Transport

Department, Hong Kong


Land area: 622 km2

Mode share


transport. It includes allmodes for all purposes.Mass transit constitutes 51%of all journeys.

Data Sources:

Tokyo Statistical Yearbook2009, Japan TokyoMetropolitan Area Travel

Survey 2008


Land area: 762 km2

Mode share


transport. It includes allmodes for all purposes. Masstransit constitutes 62% of alljourneys.

Data Sources:

National Transport Survey2008 (in French only, EnquteNationale Transports et

Dplacements)


Land area: 712 km2

Mode share

Based on the number ofjourneys by main mode of

transport. It includes allmodes for all purposes.Mass transit constitutes44% of all journeys.

Data Sources:

Singapore in Figures2011,Travel Survey 2011,Land Transport Authority,

Singapore

Motorized public

Motorized privateNon-Motorized private

Motorized public Motorized public

Motorized private

Motorized public

Non-Motorized private

Motorized private Non-Motorized private

Motorized private


8/31

SINGAPORE - Statistics4

Reference: http://www.lta.gov.sg/content/lta/en/corporate/facts_figures/statistics.html

Urban Density - Singapore is made up of 23NewTowns which have been planned to be self-sustainable. These towns are to be served by anextensive network of expressways and public

transport routes located along the variouscorridors of growth originating from the southernCentral Area (CBD). The main planning guidelinesof the model relate to the allocation of land usesand physical planning standards. In the allocationof land uses, some 3040% of land in a new townare to be provided for housing, one-third forindustrial and commercial developments, and the

rest for roads, utilities, schools, institutions, sportsfacilities, parks and playgrounds. These densityrequirements entail that new towns should bemainly high-rise, high-density housing with large-sized dwelling units.

Time taken Currently, the time taken for trips on

public transport is 1.7 times longer than by privatetransport.

StatisticsPopulation 5.1 millionArea 712 km2

Density 7442 persons/km2

Rail length 164kmRail density 30.8km/million
http://www.lta.gov.sg/content/lta/en/corporate/facts_figures/statistics.htmlhttp://www.lta.gov.sg/content/lta/en/corporate/facts_figures/statistics.html


9/31

13 Highways (Expressways) which areheavily utilised because they allow traffic toflow relatively freely due to absence of trafficlights, delivering people and goods into thecentral business district

Major arterial roads (in grey) connect theminor roads from the towns to the highways

Mass Rapid Transit 89 MRT stations; 4lines

3 LRT lines Bukit Panjang, Seng Kang,Punggol

Number of bus stops 4591 at avg 300m

interval

SINGAPORE - Transport Map4a



10/31

SINGAPORE - Mobility Snapshot4b


Public and paratransit transport:

Bus travel makes up 25% of all

travel

Vehicle ownership:

Automobiles: 110 per 1,000 people

Motorcycles: 30 per 1,000 people

Trip frequency:

2.1 trips/person/day

Expenditure on transport:

Average of 3.7% of income spent

on travel per month

Public transport basic fare:

MRT: S$0.91/trip

Bus: S$0.67/trip

Motorized public

Motorized privateNon-Motorized private


11/31

60 min to travel by public transport (bus and mrt) from city to Punggol 70 min to travel by bus from city to Punggol

TRAVEL TIME FROM CBD TO THE TOWNS

Reference: Joseph Cho-yam Lau, Spatial mismatch and the affordability of public transport for the poor in Singapores new towns, Cities 28 (2011) 230237

4c


12/31

Mobility Analysis4d

Location of MRTStations (600mradius)1

Location of BusStops along a busroute (400m radius)

Reference: 1. More "commuter-centric" public transport system promised http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1157003/1/.html

Increasing population and increasing number of people on the roads and public transport

Infrastructure cannot cope with growth

Vehicle growth rate faster than road growth rate

Overcrowding on public transport

Traffic congestion on roads and environmental pollution
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1157003/1/.htmlhttp://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/1157003/1/.html


13/31

PARIS - Statistics5

STATISTICS

Population : 2.2 million Area : 105 sq.km.Density : 20,169 persons/sq.km.Rail Length : 214 kmsRail Density : 97.2 km/million

2000 kms of highways & motorways

URBAN DENSITY

The population of Paris isapproximately 2.2 million, coveringan area of 105 sq.kms, 20,169people per square km. The result isa certain density and a certainproportion of street to building. Thisdensity is found to be ideal for

supporting continuous retail space,and therefore a walkable city. It hasalso been found to be a humanscale, not too tall to be alienating tothe dwellers or the passers-by

Reference: 1. Paris Density http://www.robertgordonarchitect.com/RGA/Paris_Density.html

Reference: 2. Breaking the Trend http://www.vibat.org/vibat_india/pdf/vibat_india_report_final.pdf Reference 3 : Transport Energy Use and Greenhouse Gases in Urban Passenger Transport Systems: A Study of 84 Global Cities http://cst.uwinnipeg.ca/documents/Transport_Greenhouse.pdf
http://www.robertgordonarchitect.com/RGA/Paris_Density.htmlhttp://www.vibat.org/vibat_india/pdf/vibat_india_report_final.pdfhttp://cst.uwinnipeg.ca/documents/Transport_Greenhouse.pdfhttp://cst.uwinnipeg.ca/documents/Transport_Greenhouse.pdfhttp://www.vibat.org/vibat_india/pdf/vibat_india_report_final.pdfhttp://www.robertgordonarchitect.com/RGA/Paris_Density.html


14/31

MRTRER-SUBURBANLINK

PARISTransport Maps5a

MAJOR MODES OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT

MRTConsists of 300 stations on 16 lines covering the10x10km area of central Paris.Metro lines are

numbered from 1 to 14 with two "bis" orsecondary lines 3b and 7b.

RER- SUBURBAN TRAINsThe RER is an integration of a modern city-centreunderground rail and a pre-existing set ofcommuterrail lines. It has several connections with the Paris

Mtro within the city of Paris. Within the city, theRER functions like the Mtro, but as it has fewerstops, the system acts as one of express trains.Since 1999 the network has consisted of fivelines: A, B, C, D and E

TRAM LINES

Encompassing the capital city of Paris, currentlyhas four tram lines, and is planning an additionallineHistorically the city of Paris was served by anextensive tramway network, but this networkhad completely closed by the end of the 1950s.The current lines are all recent constructions,dating from the 1990s onwards

S


15/31

PARISTransport Maps5b

BUS SERVICES59 line sin Paris & 205 line sin sub urbs.4591stops with approx 300 m of interval.4592 Additonal facility of night buses

VE-LIB1,451 Ve-Lib stations with 20,000 bicycles. Approximately at every 30om a Ve-Libstation

AUTO-LIB1100 stations & 1740 blue electric cars

available for car pool. 5,000 charging &parking points along the city

TIME TAKEN- OVERALL TRAVEL TIME

17 mins

BUS STOPS

VELIB


16/31

PARIS- Mobility Snapshot5c



MRT & Bus makes up for 62% of all travel

Vehicle ownership:

Automobiles: 450 per 1000 PeopleMotorcycles : 32 per 1000 people inEurope

Trip frequency:

3.4 trips/person/day


Average of 11% of income spent

on travel per month (France)


MRT & RER :1.70 EurosBus & Trams: 1.70 Euros

Motorized public

Motorized private



17/31

Mobility Analysis

Reasons for efficient working: Public transit work is massive redundancy: lots of different systems layered on top of each other, all running at high frequencies,Challenge is these systems are working together by encouraging connections from one to the other instead of duplicating MRTs are placed at approx 400-600 m coverage radius thereby enhancing the density of the network

An efficient way of reducing privately owned vehicle is introducing Autolib, encouraging people to car pool & not restrict usage of cars butto reduce emissions by using hybrid vehicles

5d

TOKYO St ti ti


18/31

StatisticsPopulation 8.8 millionArea 621.9 km2Density 14,390 persons/km2

Rail length 312 mRail density 34.4 km/million

TOKYO - Statistics6

Reference:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tokyohttp://www.kotsu.metro.tokyo.jp/eng/index.html , http://www.mercer.com/press-releases/1311145http://www.metro.tokyo.jp/ENGLISH/PROFILE/policy12.htm, http://www.iges.or.jp/en/ue/activity/mega-city/article/htm/far43.htm,

Railway is the primary mode oftransportation in Tokyo.Maximum distance between stations is1.3 km and minimum is 0.5 km and therailway network has a length of 312 km.There are also other modes oftransportation in Tokyo city such asWater bus, Monorail, Tram andHighway Bus. Buses help to fill the gapun served by the Tokyo metro orsubway network

TOKYO M bilit S h t


19/31

TOKYO - Mobility Snapshot6a



Rail transport accounts for

45% of all travelBus travel makes up less than 5%

Vehicle ownership:

Automobiles: 500 per 1,000 people

Trip frequency:

4349 trips/ day


Average of 13% of income spent

on travel per month (Japan)


Metro: $1.93 -$2.29

Taxi :$4.22-$5.22 per 1 km

(The most expensive city in Asia)

Motorized public

Motorized private


TOKYO Mobilit Anal sis


20/31

6b

Location of MRT

Stations (600mradius)1

Location of BusStops along a busroute (400m radius)

TOKYO - Mobility Analysis

TOKYO Mobility Analysis


21/31

6c

Mobility Management (MM)

Transportation management policy purpose to reduce car use and promote sustainable transportation modes, such as

public transport and bicycles.

Tokyo Metropolitan Government started Safe Bicycle

Riding Promotion Plan in January 2007. 4 main measures :

-Reducing illegally-parked bicycles

-Developing bicycle paths

-Improving bicycle traffic manners

-Improving bicycle mechanics

Regarding this plan

parking facilities, close to station,

wider roads and sidewalk,

bicycle parking tower

Prohibiting vehicles during peak hour

Reasons for efficient working:

Walkable design with pedestrian as the highest priority

Train station as prominent feature of town center

A regional node containing a mixture of uses in close proximity including office, residential, retail, and civic uses

High density, high-quality development within 10-minute walk circle surrounding train station ( 400m ) Collector support transit systems including trolleys, streetcars, light rail, and buses, etc

Designed to include the easy use of bicycles, scooters, and rollerblades as daily support transportation systems

Reduced and managed parking inside 10-minute walk circle around town center / train station

TOKYO - Mobility Analysis

Reference: http://www.transitorienteddevelopment.org/

HONGKONG Statistics


22/31

StatisticsPopulation 7millionArea 1104 km2

Density 6,340persons/km2

Hong Kong primarily consists ofthree main territories: Hong KongIsland, Kowloon Peninsula, and

the New Territories

Hong Kong's terrain is hilly andmountainous with steep slopes.

Hence the developm ent andgrowth of the city is along these

natural barriers

URBAN DENSITY - The growth ofHongkong has been an urbansprawl .The central businessdistrict is at Victoria peak.The city has a compactdevelopment with all typologiesmixed within a particular area.Hongkong is know for its highmixed use and compactness inplanning

HONGKONG - Statistics7

Reference:Journal of Transport and Land Use 1:2 (Fall 2008) pp. 2349

HONGKONG Transport Maps


23/31

HONGKONGTransport Maps7aTRANSPORT NETWORK

Roads - Major roads cut across thedevelopment connecting most parts ofcountry 1,831 km of paved highwaysconstituting a total of nine highways

MRT primary transport medium Formsthe back bone of the transport systemconnecting almost all parts of the island. A total of 83 stations Cuts through thecentre of the development for betterconnectivity.

Buses,lightrails,skyrail,trams play therole of feeder modes of transport atdifferent parts of the development

Ferries transport of goods andpassengers HongKong has two busiestports in the worldAirport express dedicated expressline for air travel

TIME TAKEN over all travel time 45min.Transfer time between mechanisedtransport modes is 3 min

AFFORDABILITY cost of publictransport lesser than Singapore.Limiting private car ownership 50 carsper 1000 ppl ,lesser parking spaces,

Electronic road pricing

Reference:Journal of Trans ort and Land Use 1:2 Fall 2008 . 2349, htt ://www.info. ov.hk/ ia/ eneral/201104/09/P201104090213.htm

Hong Kong Mobility Snapshot
http://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201104/09/P201104090213.htmhttp://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201104/09/P201104090213.htmhttp://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/201104/09/P201104090213.htm


24/31

Hong Kong - Mobility Snapshot7b



30% of the people use rails

60% buses, public light buses and taxis.10 %use private cars

Vehicle ownership:

55 cars per 1,000 people

50% lesser than Singapore

Trip frequency:

11 million passenger journeys/day


Average of 8.44% of income spenton travel per month


HK$0.35 per minute-60 percentlower than the MRT in Singapore

Motorized public

Motorized private

HONGKONG Mobility Analysis


25/31

The MRT stations are closelyplaced, which enables greater

coverage. This in turn reduces inthe number of interchangesbetween modes .

The bus network serves as anefficient feeder system. The busstops are closely placed resulting in

Greater accessibility and Lesserwaiting time

Location of MRT Stations(600m radius)

Location of Bus Stopsalong a bus route (400mradius)

HONGKONG - Mobility Analysis7c

Curitiba Statistics8


26/31

Curitiba - Statistics8


StatisticsPopulation 1.8 millionArea 432 km2

Density 4167 persons/km2Rail length nilRail density nil

Transportation and land use planning of Curitiba ishighly co-ordinated.the transport system has

integrated activities to contribute to urban change.

The growth pattern and the urban density ofCuritiba is highly guided by the city s transportplanning.

The growth pattern originates from the centraltowards the outer part of the city.

The stretch along the transport corridors is highlydense so as to compliment the public transportnetwork, however the other parts have low tomedium dense neighbourhood planning.

Curitiba Transportation Map


27/31

Curitiba - Transportation Map8a


The Bus Rapid network forms the backbone ofPublic transport in Curitiba. The five BRTcorridors connect the CBD to different parts ofthe city & the other feeder networks branch out

connecting the other parts of the city 81.4 km (50.5 miles) of special central lanes,exclusive roads 2.4 million passengers use the IntegratedSystem of Public Transportation on a dailybasis.1,910 buses that serve 347 lines1,149,456 vehicles, with an average annual

geometric rate of 5.36% in ten yearsinhabitants per vehicle was of 1.615 dedicated BRT linesTube stops, which equate to conventionalbus stops and are located at spacing of about450 to500 m along the 58 km of busways. first subway is under construction351 tube stops

Curitiba Mobility Snapshot


28/31

Curitiba- Mobility Snapshot8b



Bus and BRT travel makes up 45% of all

travel

Vehicle ownership:

638 per 1,000 people

Trip frequency:

11 million passenger journeys/day


Up to 10% of income

Public transport basic fare:Bus: US$0.60/trip

BENCHMARKING FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT USAGE


29/31

BENCHMARKING FOR PUBLIC TRANSPORT USAGE9MODES

(NON- MOTORISED)

PARIS CURITIBA HONG-KONG TOKYO SINGAPORE

For Transit purposes

100m


300m


100m


300m


400m

0-100m 200m 0 200m 100m

MODES

(MOTORISED-

PUBLIC)

Coverage Circle-

Paris

Coverage Circle-

Curitiba

Coverage Circle-

Hong-Kong

Coverage Circle-

Tokyo

Coverage Circle-

Singapore

N.A. N.A. 50 150 m 500 m 1000 m

300-700m N.A. 600m 500-1300 m 360-5000 m

1700-3300m N.A. NA 7000 km N.A.

420-800m N.A. 200-300m 400 m N.A.

N.A. 450 -500m NA N.A. N.A.

300m 450 -500m 100m 400 m 400 m

MODES

(MOTORISED-PRIVATE)PARIS CURITIBA HONG-KONG TOKYO SINGAPORE

6-12 km scattered 6-20 km scattered 6-30 km scattered 6-30 km scattered 6-30 km scattered

6-12 km scattered No No No No

LRT

MRT

Suburban Rail

Tram

BRT

Bus

Comparative Analysis Mobility Snapshots10


30/31

Comparative AnalysisMobility Snapshots10

Hong- Kong Tokyo Paris Curitiba Singapore

NEW MOBILITY

Distributed Travel

Information

Fare Integration

Hybrid Car Sharing

Hybrid Bike Sharing

Auto Free Housing

INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT

Congestion Charging

Comprehensive Bus

Management System

Automated Traffic

Enforcement

LIVEABILITY

Pedestrian Realms

Breaking the drivingRoutine

Shared Space

CITY LOGISTICS

Centralised Urban

Distribution & Logistics

Centre

Environmental Zones

Comparative Analysis Towards Recommendations10


31/31

31

Paris Planned city; medium to high

density Majority of travel by MRT & bus

(62%)

Reasons for efficiency Multi modal infrastructure with

high density

Efficient ways of reducing

privately owned vehicles

Recommendations for Sg Car sharing & bikesharing

Hybrid vehicles Car free days

Tokyo Transformed from multipolar to

multifunctional concentrated type city

Most of public transport provided by

railways. (51%)

Reasons for efficiency Density of network

Recommendations for Sg Improving bicycle lanes

Mixed use planning thereby

improving micro-mobility

Curitiba

Urban growth coordinated with

transport planning.

Majority of travel by BRT (41%)

Reasons for efficiency Excellent bus management system

Transport oriented development

Recommendations for Sg Densifying areasaround transport

nodes

Hong Kong

Compact Mixed use developement

Majority of travel by rail (90%)

Reasons for efficiency Lesser coverage radius forboth MRT & Bus stops

Recommendations for Sg Mixed use planning thereby

improving micro-mobility

Water Ferry Services

Comparative Analysis - Towards Recommendations10a

Documents

Stage 1 Mobility