public transport progress and failures · the australian research council key centre in transport...

The Australian Research Council Key Centre in Transport Management

Institute of Transport Studies (Monash)

Public Transport Progress and Failures - Keeping up with Growth in Australian Cities

Engineers Australia Seminar 15th April 2014 Engineering House Level 2, 21 Bedford Street North Melbourne VIC 3051 !Professor Graham Currie Institute of Transport Studies Monash University



This paper looks at Australian urban public transport progress in keeping up with population growth

2

Progress?Performance Conclusions



Agenda1. Introduction

2. Performance

3. Progress?

4. Conclusions

!

!

!3



There are many reasons why Australia should encourage urban public transport as an alternative to the car

Car Dependence

Vehicle Emissions and Greenhouse

Noise/ Community Segregation/ Bad Cities

Transport Accidents

Oil Dependence Futures

Motoring Costs Affordability and Poverty

The Obesity Epidemic

Encouraging Urban Sprawl

Traffic Congestion and its Economic Impacts

The problem is that we don’t have much public transport in Australian cities



BUSES Melbourne – PT for 2/3rds of residents

Weekday Service Frequency (2006)

AV. MELBOURNE Peak Off Peak 40m 50m

Weekday Service Span

AV. MELBOURNE Weekday 06:46-18:53

Source: Currie G (2003) “Melbourne Metropolitan Bus Plan – An Overview of Key Findings” Bus Industry Confederation National Conference, Queenstown, New Zealand, April 2003



Source: Currie (2003)Source: Currie (2003)

Weekday Bus Services

The bus network on weekdays..




contrasts somewhat with weekends

Sunday Bus Services




Australian cities have numerous PT equity problems – many high need/no service areas

8

Service Supplied (Green) – Highest Social Need Areas (Red)

Source: Currie, G. (2010) Quantifying spatial gaps in public transport supply based on social needs, JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT GEOGRAPHY 18 (2010) 31–41

Source: Delbosc A and Currie, G. (2011) ‘Using Lorenz Curves to Assess Public Transport Equity’ JOURNAL OF TRANSPORT GEOGRAPHY Volume 19, Issue 6, November 2011, Pages 1252-1259



Other Australian cities have similar issues

9

Service Level Benchmark

• 30 min headway • 8:30a.m. to 15:30 • 800m access distance

City

Sydney

Source

Hurni (2005)

Population BELOW Benchmark

54%

• 20min pk 60min off peak headway

• 500m access distancePerth PTA WA (2005) 29%

• 30 min headway • 5 a.m. to midnightMelbourne Cheal (2003) 83%

Coverage of Metropolitan Areas Without ‘Good’ Public Transport



The other key PT problem is that the little we have is highly overcrowded

10



PT expansion is clearly needed for: 1. existing needs and 2. growing needs

11

Expansion of Public

Transport in Australian

Cities

Existing Needs !

• Gaps in service • Uncompetitive with

the car • Unequal

distribution of service

• Full trains

Growing Needs !

• Population growth




2. Performance

3. Progress?

4. Conclusions

!

!

!12



Since 2003-4 all urban PT grew led by Perth rail (+149%), Adelaide tram (+76%) and SEQ/Mel Bus (+68%/53%)

13

Source: Department of Transport/ Public Transport Victoria Annual Reports, Translink , Transperth and DPTI Adelaide Data Request

100

140

180

220

260

2003-4 2005-6 2007-8 2009-10 2011-12 2013-14

SEQPerthAdelaideMelbourne

Year

Change in SERVICE SUPPLIED by Mode (Vkms p.a.) – SEQ, Perth, Melbourne, Adelaide since 2003-4

Change In

Service Provided

2003-4=100

Rail

100

140

180

220

260

2003-4 2005-6 2007-8 2009-10 2011-12 2013-14

Bus

100

140

180

220

260

2003-4 2005-6 2007-8 2009-10 2011-12 2013-14

TramPerth 149%

Melbourne 29%

SEQ 23%

Adelaide 2%

SEQ 68%

Melbourne 53%

Perth 32%

Adelaide 21%

Adelaide 76%

Melbourne 5%

Mandurah Rail,

Eastern Busway

Northern Busway

Inner Northern Busway

SmartBus 703, 700

SmartBus 901

SmartBus 902

SmartBus DART

CBD Extn 1

CBD Extn 2



Since 2003-4 all PT SERVICE increased 62% SEQ, 47% Perth, 40% Melbourne and 20% Adelaide…

14


100

118

135

153

170

2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Year

Change in total SERVICE SUPPLIED (Vkms p.a.) – SEQ, Perth, Melbourne, Adelaide since 2003-4

Change In

Service Provided

(2003-4=100)

SEQ

Perth

Melbourne

Adelaide

62%

47%

40%

20%



…but in SEQ and Melbourne the growth trend has stalled

15


100

118

135

153

170

2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Year

Change in total SERVICE SUPPLIED (Vkms p.a.) – SEQ, Melbournesince 2003-4

Change In

Service Provided

SEQ

Melbourne

62%

40%


Institute of Transport Studies (Monash)16

Source: ABS

100

110

120

130

140

2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Year

Change in POPULATION – SEQ, Perth, Melbourne, Adelaide since 2003-4

Change In

Residential Population

SEQ

Perth

Melbourne

Adelaide

31%

25%

10%

20%

This is a pity because POPULATION growth has boomed in all cities; no stalled Pop growth in SEQ/Mel growth 2011-13



Source: ITS (Monash) Analysis

90

103

115

128

140

2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Year

Change in SERVICE/HEAD – SEQ, Perth, Melbourne, Adelaide since 2003-4

Change In

Service per Capita

SEQ

Perth

Melbourne

Adelaide

32%

22%

12%11%

SERVICE/HEAD has increased; real progress in all cities…




90

103

115

128

140

2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Year

Change In

Service per Capita

SEQ

Melbourne

32%

22%

…but SEQ and Melbourne have stalled and SERVICE/HEAD is now decling; we are going backwards

Change in SERVICE/HEAD – SEQ, Melbournesince 2003-4




2. Performance

3. Progress?

4. Conclusions

!

!

!19



There are strong rationales to increase Australian urban PT supply to fill existing needs and to grow with population




90

103

115

128

140

2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7 2007-8 2008-9 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14


Year

Change in SERVICE/HEAD – SEQ, Perth, Melbourne, Adelaide since 2003-4

Change In

Service per Capita

SEQ

Perth

Melbourne

Adelaide

32%

22%

12%11%

Real net progress has been made in all cities but SEQ and Melbourne are now going backwards

public transport progress and failures · the australian research council key centre in transport...

Documents