Promoting Public Transport Investment in the National Interest Reece Waldock Chief Executive Officer, Public Transport Authority (WA) AusRailPlus 2003 Conference & Exhibition Wednesday November 19, 2003

 More and more people living in urban areas  Australia is one of the most urbanised countries in the world, with strong population growth  Western Australia – currently 1.8 million people  Perth – 1.5 million people  Perth – an additional 700,000 (50% increase) by 2031 The Big Issues - Population

 On every indicator, Australia has a high level of car dependency – much higher than European standards and comparable with US averages The Big Issues - Car dependency Road supply (length of road per person) CBD parking spots per 1000 persons % of work trips on public transport Australian avg – 8.3m pp Perth – 10.7m pp Melbourne – 7.7m pp Sydney – 6.2m pp USA avg – 6.9m pp European avg – 2.4m pp Australian avg – 489 Perth – 631 USA avg – 468 European avg – 238 Australian avg – 14.5% Perth – 9.7% Melbourne – 15.9% Sydney – 25% USA avg – 9% European avg – 39%

 A detailed study of 100 cities worldwide showed that Australian cities spend per cent of its local GDP on passenger transport (private and public transport operating and investment costs)  Brisbane 17.7%  Melbourne 11.8%  Perth12.9%  Sydney11.1%  This is due to the intense car dependence in cities with less than 10% of total transport costs invested in public transport Economic costs of car dependency

High costs of passenger transport

 A public-transport oriented Perth could save about $1.7 billion annually in passenger transport costs (based on 7 to 8% GDP rather than 13%). $300 million dollars more than the entire New MetroRail project budget  In Perth, total passenger transport costs (operating and investment) amount to an average of about $3,800 per person per year. The annual per capita cost of the Perth to Mandurah rail project over the 38 year financial life of the project, including capital and interest payments is estimated to be $47 per person (based on a Perth population of million) Rail v car – economic factors Source: Don’t Rail Against Rail, by Jeffrey Kenworthy, Associate Professor in Sustainable Settlements, Institute for Sustainability and Technology Policy, Murdoch University

 Wealthy, successful cities are also high public transport users  Good public transport reduces individual’s transport costs Key messages

 Long history of gross imbalances between road and public transport funding in Australia  Criticism over the public transport system reflects the privileged position of roads in the funding hierarchy and the uncritical way roads have been funded for decades Imbalances between road & public transport funding

 Urban sprawl brings high transport costs, traffic congestion and pollution to the community The Big Issues – Urban Sprawl

Social  Cost of congestion  Quality of life – amenity  Traffic accidents  Social underclass Environmental  Pollution – quality  Energy wastage  Noise - urban Triple bottom line – the other two dimensions

 Should urban roads be built according to traffic demand or should traffic, with the help of public transport, be adapted to existing urban road space?  Predict and provide approach no longer valid  By 2006 the Northern Suburbs Railway will be carrying the equivalent of 3 freeway lanes of people to Perth The Big Issues - Transport Planning

 Perth (SKM), Australian (Warren Centre) and international market research (UITP) suggests decision-makers underestimate the expectations and strengths of public opinion relating to public transport funding or investment Decision makers underestimate community aspirations Decision Makers Opinion 82% favour public transport 89% favour public transport Public Opinion80% favour public opinion 70% favour public transport Decision makers expectations of public opinion 43% favour public transport 56% favour public transport Sources: UITP and the Warren Centre. Commissioned by the University of Sydney Europe Warren Centre

 The ‘Dialogue with the City’ (September 13, 2003) consultation forum was the biggest interactive consultation ever held in the southern hemisphere  The forum was held to devise objectives for Government to assist Perth to become the world’s most liveable city Dialogue with the City – The Event

 More than 80% of people wanted trends of other liveable cities in Perth. In particular, for environmental protection to be of equal importance to economic growth, for public transport to take the load off private cars, and for planning decisions to be made with the needs of the whole of Perth in mind, not just local residents  More than 70% of delegates wanted the Government to limit urban sprawl and supported an urban growth boundary  Delegates’ hopes for the future included reduced car dependency and more public transport, especially rail and bus  Delegates were concerned about the sustainability of our future and protecting Perth’s unique quality of life for future generations Dialogue with the City - Key Conclusions

 77 per cent of delegates thought we needed to take further action to reduce our high level of car dependency  There was a preference for expansion of rail systems over new road construction  Two thirds of delegates preferred that development occur around corridors based near major public transport routes, rather than growing evenly in all directions  People who visited the on-line discussion group were mainly concerned about improving and promoting public transport Dialogue with the City – Conclusions 2

 Percentage of weekday trips:  Perth7%  Sydney11%  Melbourne9%  Brisbane7%  Adelaide5%  Whilst Perth has shown better patronage growth than other Australian cities, market share of all trips is not increasing given overall trip growth  Requires strong leadership to achieve target of 12% by 2021 National public transport scoreboard

How do we grow public transport? TRAVEL DEMAND SERVICE IMPROVEMENT INFORMATION LAND USE PLANNING Road PricingTimetabling Frequency Routes Reliability Ticketing Marketing On-line route Selection Timetables Customer Call Centre Taxation & Pricing Distortions Parking Travelsmart Behaviour Change Public Transport Investment

Land use planning dimensions Timetables TRAVEL DEMAND SERVICE IMPROVEMENT INFORMATION LAND USE PLANNING Road PricingTimetabling Frequency Routes Reliability Ticketing Marketing On-line route Selection Customer Call Centre Taxation & Pricing Distortions Parking Travelsmart Behaviour Change Public Transport Investment Timetables

 Urban density is more cost-effective than urban sprawl  Urban development around transport nodes Land use planning dimensions

Travel demand Timetables TRAVEL DEMAND SERVICE IMPROVEMENT INFORMATION LAND USE PLANNING Road PricingTimetabling Frequency Routes Reliability Ticketing Marketing On-line route Selection Customer Call Centre Taxation & Pricing Distortions Parking Travelsmart Behaviour Change Public Transport Investment Timetables

 Need to get policy settings right at Federal, State and Local Government level Travel demand

Service Improvement/Information Timetables TRAVEL DEMAND SERVICE IMPROVEMENT INFORMATION LAND USE PLANNING Road PricingTimetabling Frequency Routes Reliability Ticketing Marketing On-line route Selection Customer Call Centre Taxation & Pricing Distortions Parking Travelsmart Behaviour Change Public Transport Investment Timetables

 Need to provide quality, high frequency and reliable services  Services need to be integrated in terms of ticketing (SmartRider) and modality (buses feeding into railway stations) in order to remove transfer penalties Service Improvement/Information

 Recent decades have seen a shift towards integration within the public transport system enabling different modes to serve the roles to which they are best suited  Based on passengers interchanging easily between modes (need to get physical infrastructure, ticketing, fare systems integrated)  Increased investment in urban rail has been associated with re-orientation of bus network into feeders Public Transport Integration vs Competition

Public transport usage in Perth People who travel to work by public transport

Correlation of rail investment vs patronage in Perth

Rail patronage growth analysis Source: RTSA “Rail for Sustainable Cities”

New MetroRail project scope (green)

The New MetroRail Project will effectively double the size of the urban passenger rail system:  Extension of the Northern Suburbs Railway to Clarkson (2004)  Spur line to Thornlie (2004)  Perth to Mandurah Railway to Rockingham (2006) and Mandurah (2007)  93 new electric railcars  84 route kilometres of new track  15 new stations  Patronage to increase from 101,000 to 170,500 per day in 2006/07 New MetroRail project

Rail v car journey times & speeds – morning peak

City map

Artist’s impression of Esplanade Station

Artist’s impression of William St Station

 Investment in Perth’s rail system has been effective and it’s difficult to imagine the city without its electric lines  Perth rail patronage rose from eight million boardings per year in 1991 to almost 31 million in 2002 and was only prevented from rising further because of a lack of railcars. This figure will reach 50 million by 2007  Cities world-wide have reaped enormous benefits by building high quality rail systems especially in creating attractive, vital and liveable cities that attract investment Rail – an investment in the future

Public Transport Agencies/Operators  Getting their act together  Progress on:  System integration  Efficiencies (competition)  Improved frequencies/patronage/building and marketing of key routes  Better customer information and ticketing National Public Transport Scorecard

State Government(s)  Generally clear public transport targets (desired market share) but lack of real commitment and funding to close the gap  Investment in PT often episodic and modal in nature (also capital focussed “ribbon cutting” versus investment in recurrent service budgets)  Mixed effort in travel demand initiatives (parking demand/control management, $’s for Travelsmart) National Public Transport Scorecard

Federal Government  No national framework or plan for public transport  Current policies on balance are having a negative influence on public transport (e.g. FBT, novated leases)  Confusing signals (Kyoto, Auslink) National Public Transport Scorecard

 A united industry approach to drive the national agenda - National Passenger Transport Alliance  Federal and State support for:  National PT plan  Demonstrates project funding support  PT friendly policy particularly travel demand, taxation etc  PT investment support National public transport – the way ahead

 Forming a coalition of support/advocacy to realise community aspirations:  Grass roots support e.g. old growth forests, environment, recycling  Educate the kids  Promote best practice models:  Success stories – cities that work  The decade of rail National public transport – the way ahead (2)