II. Organizing g Urban Transport Functions

Transcription

1 II. Organizing g Urban Transport Functions Introduction to Public Transport Planning and Reform II-1

2 Symptoms of Dysfunctional Ub Urban Transport Traffic congestion Local pollution, high green house gas emissions i Excessive energy use High risk of traffic accidents Limited accessibility to employment, education, health, or social opportunities, especially for the poor II-2

3 Impacts of Dysfunctional Transport Lost economic potential Increased logistics costs Decreased city attractiveness and competitiveness Decreased quality of life II-3

4 Typical Causes of Urban Transport Problems Insufficient, i poorly managed services and infrastructure Lack of clear and coherent policies Nonexistent, weak, disorganized institutions II-4

5 Responsibility for Ub Urban Transport Urban transport is a local issue But, all levels of government are involved Nature of involvement depends on: Political, administrative, and fiscal structure of country Relative economic, administrative, and/or political importance of the metropolitan area II-5

6 Ub Urban Transport tpolicies i Countries and cities are increasingly formally adopting comprehensive urban transport policies Good policies should: Outline desired goals and objectives to guide planning and decision-making Identify the legal, institutional and fiscal means to achieve goals and objectives Clarify the roles and responsibilities of different levels of government Should reflect their political, administrative, and fiscal powers II-6

7 Ub Urban Transport tinstitutions Develop and implement policy instruments to achieve desired outcomes Structure, roles and responsibilities, and institutional relationships are important policy decisions Have significant impact on how well the urban transport system is planned, constructed, cted and operated II-7

8 Institutional Functions Strategic planning Financial planning Resource allocation Major investment corridor planning and implementation Land use, site planning II-8

9 Ub Urban Transport tfunctions Traffic and parking management Traffic engineering Traffic law enforcement Public transport operation, management Public transport regulation Coordination Planning Investment Management, age e operations o II-9

10 Institutional Models No single, preferred model Central governments have interests t Policy Possibly technical assistance and capacity building Possibly financial Central governments should make explicit provisions for urban transport However, roles, responsibilities, relationships with other functions vary by country II-10

11 Ub Urban Size and dcomplexity Large urban areas, with multiple political/ administrative i ti jurisdictions Local governments responsible for local transport in their areas of jurisdiction Single metropolitan transport institution responsible for transport across jurisdictions Incentives must be in place to promote coordination and avoid overlaps and conflicts Small urban areas Single-city administration responsible for all transport functions II-11

12 Urban Transport Institutions in a Metropolitan Context II-12

13 Keys to Successful Metropolitan Transport Institutions Planning/decision-making for all significant public investments in all transport modes Authority over strategic operations and management policies e.g., number of actors, levels and types of services, pricing, public information, integration of modes and services Defined and predictable sources of funding Formal linkages to land-use and environmental planning Formal public/private sector participation Sound quantitative basis for decisions i II-13

14 Integration ti Is Important t Physical Facilities e.g., terminals, exclusive bus lanes, ticketing infrastructure, parking Services e.g., network structure, schedule coordination User Charges e.g., fares, tolls, fees Customer Information II-14

15 Physical and Service Integration II-15

16 Physical and Service Integration ti Railway Station/Bus Terminal Shijaizhuang, China Bike parking at Metro Beijing, China Local Bus BRT Interchange Guayaquil, Equador M BRT M BRT Metro/Local Bus/BRT Interface, Mexico City II-16

17 User Charges and Customer Information Integration ti II-17

18 Governance and Organization Policy entity approves/endorses policies, plans, programs and projects by vote - Representatives of senior governments (central/state/provincial); ministers / secretaries / directors - Representatives of local governments; elected/appointed officials, e.g. mayors, council chairs, bureau heads Dedicated staff (Secretariat) does technical work to support decision making Lean internal organizational structure Public advisory process and structure II-18

19 Metropolitan Transport Governance Case Studies Paris London New York Vancouver Montreal Madrid Singapore II-19

20 Authority Paris/London/New York City Organization Authority Paris London New York Syndicat des All public transport; Transports d Ile-de- Entire conurbation France (STIF) All public transport, roads and highways, Transport for London bridges and tunnels, (TFL) NMT; Entire conurbation All public transport, Metropolitan some bridges and Transportation tunnels; New York Authority (MTA) State portion of conurbation II-20

21 Functions Paris/London/New York City Organization Functions Paris Syndicat des Transports d Ile- de-france (STIF) 1-8 London Transport for London (TFL) 1-8 New York 1. Strategic Planning 2. Investment, management, ops. policy planning 3. System/corridor planning 4. Financial planning 5. Long and short-term priority setting, decision making for investment, operating subsidies Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Infrastructure project implementation 7. Service, operations regulation, enforcement 8. Strategic service, operations management 9. PT Service planning 10. Daily PT operation, management II-21

22 Sources of Funds Paris/London/New York City Paris London New York Sources of Funds Organization (other than PT fares) Syndicat des Dedicated employer tax; Transports d Ilede-France (STIF) general revenue local, region, department Congestion charges, Transport for central & local Govt. London (TFL) general revenue Federal, State and local Govt. general revenue; Metropolitan dedicated taxes on Transportation petroleum businesses, Authority (MTA) mortgages and real estate; bridge/tunnel tolls II-22

23 City Organization Authority Vancouver Montreal Madrid Singapore TransLink Agence Metropolitaine de Transport (AMT) Consorcio Regional Transporte (CRTM) Land Transport Authority (LTA) All public transport, highways, roads, bridges, tunnels, NMT, parking; Entire conurbation All metropolitan public transport, Entire conurbation All metropolitan public transport; Entire conurbation All public transport, non-motorized modes, highways, roads bridges, tunnels, parking; Entire II-23 conurbation

24 City Organization Functions Vancouver TransLink 1 8 Montreal Madrid Singapore Agence Metropolitaine de Transport (AMT) 1 9 (metropolitan) Consorcio Regional 1-5 Transporte (CRTM) 7-9 Land Transport 1-9 Authority (LTA) 1. Strategic Planning 6. Infrastructure project 2. Investment, management, implementation operations policy planning 7. Service, operations regulation, 3. System/corridor planning enforcement e 4. Financial planning 8. Strategic service, operations management 5. Long and short-term priority setting, decision making for 9. Public Transport Service planning investment, operating subsidies 10. Daily Public Transport operation, management II-24

25 City Vancouver Montreal Madrid Singapore Organization TransLink Agence Metropolitaine de Transport (AMT) Consorcio Regional Transporte (CRTM) Land Transport Authority (LTA) Sources of Funds (Other than PT fares) Dedicated gasoline, property, power, parking taxes Dedicated gasoline, vehicle registration and property taxes; Provincial and local government general revenues (non-residential off- street parking tax in law but not in force) National, Regional and local Govt. subsidies (not dedicated) National (local) Govt. general revenue, much of which is derived from auto II-25 registration, gas WORLD taxes, BANK

26 Can New Institutions Make A Difference? Yes!!! Better coordination/integration/planning Yes, but Additional funding helps! Montreal (million) Madrid Establishment of AMT c Transport Trips Public Transport Trips Publi II-26

27 Organizing for BRT Planning/Building/Operating Models City (or state) multi-modal public transport authority does everything e.g., Paris, New York, Los Angeles Municipal (or state) bus company does everything e.g., Istanbul, Beijing Special purpose public entity plans; contracts to design/build/operate BRT/complimentary feeders; provides oversight, similar to way Metros are done: Latin model II-27

28 Evaluating the Options Areas with greatest success BRT, other rapid transit modes (e.g., metro) and other public transport services (e.g., local bus) are under authority of a single institution May either directly operate or competitively procure system/services Areas with planning/integration/quality problems BRT planning/implementation/operation is activity of existing independent bus operating authority II-28

29 What s Best Arrangement? Varies as function of government structure, existing public transport situation Latin model works well in places where there isn t an existing SOE providing bus and/or metro services II-29

30 Lessons Learned Urban areas with the best transport systems have Clear policies and An integrated metropolitan transport institution with: Strong statutory authority Planning, investment, and strategic management / operations for all modes and entire metropolitan area regarding Positive, cooperative relationships All relevant public, private and citizen stakeholders Independent, dedicated funding sources Superior human, data, and technical resources II-30

31 Summary Presented urban transport challenges Stressed importance of transport policies Described the functions of urban transport institutions Elaborated on the specific case of metropolitan transport institutions Discussed strategic planning, PT regulation, and modal coordination as key issues Identified key success factors to be strong statutory authority and dedicated funding II-31