Increasing PT Mode Share

[#Metro]

Mode share describes the % split between car travel and Public Transport/Active Transport.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USCommutePatterns2006.png

Where LA is in the diagram is a bit of a surprise!

How could we go about increasing PT mode share in Brisbane?
What is the most important measure to do this? Is is just more money or are there some other things that can be done.

Eu mode shares (selected cities):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_share

[ozbob]

http://profile.id.com.au/Default.aspx?id=327&pg=117&gid=1390&type=enum

This gives data from the 2006 census for method for travel to work Taringa.

From memory, Taringa has the highest public transport use for the majority of Brisbane.

As can be noted car use is around 43%.  Taringa is high relatively as they do have a good train frequency (peak and during the workday) and bus is OK as well.
Interesting data ...

The major differences between the method of travel to work of Taringa and South East Queensland were:

    * A larger percentage of train commuters (13.8% compared to 4.4%);
    * A larger percentage of bus commuters (10.4% compared to 3.9%);
    * A larger percentage of bicycle commuters (3.4% compared to 0.9%), and;
    * A smaller percentage of car - as driver commuters (42.8% compared to 59.9%).]The major differences between the method of travel to work of Taringa and South East Queensland were:

    * A larger percentage of train commuters (13.8% compared to 4.4%);
    * A larger percentage of bus commuters (10.4% compared to 3.9%);
    * A larger percentage of bicycle commuters (3.4% compared to 0.9%), and;
    * A smaller percentage of car - as driver commuters (42.8% compared to 59.9%).

To increase public transport ?

1.  It must be there to use

2.  It must be frequent

3.  It must be relatively affordable ..

Taringa is a good example ..

[#Metro]

This is a good link!
There is a comparison feature. I've used this to compare with 1991 info.
I'll have a look at another suburb, busway did not exist in 1991, so maybe we can see an increase in the busway suburbs.
Still, gains for individual modes are all below 5%.

Compared against 1991:

Trains: up 1%
Bus: up 3.7%   <---- may reflect BUZ and bus frequency increases
Bicycle: up 1.4 %
Walking: up 0.8%

Overall: 6.9% active transport increase (not bad actually)

Car: down 9.3%

[#Metro]

Upper Mt Gravatt

Same comparison, 2006 to 1991

Bus: + 2.5% <---- Busway?
Train: + 0.3%
Bicycle: + 0.3%

Although the busway has attracted heaps of people, the population is increasing very quickly as well.
These seem like small increases, all below 5%.

[#Metro]

Does anyone know PT mode shares for Ipswich, Gold & Sunshine Coasts?

[stephenk]

Where LA is in the diagram is a bit of a surprise!

Were you expecting it to be better or worse? LA has relatively poor public transport. The recent additions to the LRT network are like trying to bandage a shark bite with a band aid.

Going back to increasing public transport share, things that would increase it (not necessarily in order of effectiveness) are:
1) High frequency - turn up and go.
2) High reliability - on time, and not full to capacity.
3) Comparable journey times to other modes.
4) Good coverage - even better if combined with 1).
5) Attractive price relative to other modes - either lower fares or higher fuel prices.
6) Safe - e.g. low crime.
7) Easy to use - e.g. clear and useful maps, easy to use & integrated fare system.

It should be noted that the lower the population density and larger the area, the harder it is to cost efficiently achieve 1) and 4) (and thus 3), without having to increase 5).

I'm sure there a few things I've missed off the list.

[#Metro]

Were you expecting it to be better or worse? LA has relatively poor public transport. The recent additions to the LRT network are like trying to bandage a shark bite with a band aid.

Going back to increasing public transport share, things that would increase it (not necessarily in order of effectiveness) are:
1) High frequency - turn up and go.
2) High reliability - on time, and not full to capacity.
3) Comparable journey times to other modes.
4) Good coverage - even better if combined with 1).
5) Attractive price relative to other modes - either lower fares or higher fuel prices.
6) Safe - e.g. low crime.
7) Easy to use - e.g. clear and useful maps, easy to use & integrated fare system.

It should be noted that the lower the population density and larger the area, the harder it is to cost efficiently achieve 1) and 4) (and thus 3), without having to increase 5).

I'm sure there a few things I've missed off the list.

I would agree with these things, though IMHO they're too general to be grasped into individual actions for the Brisbane context.  
Something specific, IMHO- I'd like to see more BUZ buses, down Ipswich Road, Kingsford Smith. The gains in PT mode share over time are also rather low. 2.5% mode share gain for Upper Mt Gravatt over 15 years despite a busway going in. That's not to say the busway should not have been built; it has huge patronage. But compared to population growth its just keeping our heads above water so to speak.

Its easy to blame "lower density" but we now have PT modes to deal with this: busway and feeder services.

More aggressive cuts to car mode share are required.  

[ozbob]

SEQ is public transport poor.  This is the fundamental reason why there is a high car share of trips.

Where the public transport is accessible and reasonably frequent it is used.

Trains or buses running at every hour or worse with very limited hours of operation is just anti-public transport.

The fact that the branch line to Richlands is the first new extension of the rail network for a very long time just confirms the basic problem.

If it is not there it cannot be used  ..

There are very significant benefits by increasing the public transport share, far outweighs the costs.   Reduced congestion, lessened environmental impacts and reduction in road trauma. 

[ozbob]

Journey to work 2001 SEQ  click here!

Travel to work in Australian capital cities, 1976-2006: an analysis of census data
Paul Mees, Eden Sorupia & John Stone December 2007
click here!

From Mees et al. above

Policy recommendations

These findings demonstrate the need for significant changes to federal and state
transport policies; especially if Australia is to meet its obligations to combat global
warming. Transport is the second-largest source of greenhouse emissions after
electricity generation, and the level of transport emissions is growing rapidly.
The census data show that treating traffic problems by building more roads is an
ineffective response. The main result has been to shift travellers out of environmentally
friendly modes and into cars. By contrast, the performance of public transport and
walking can be improved more cheaply and would produce superior environmental
outcomes.

The former federal government's Auslink funding program has exacerbated the
problems identified in this report, because it is biased in favour of roads and against
public transport. It needs to be replaced by a new 'mode-neutral' funding model which
is tied to environmental outcomes, especially the reduction of greenhouse emissions.
State governments also need to change their transport policies, which remain dominated
by motorway-building. In addition, they need to reform the governance and
management of public transport, especially in Sydney and Melbourne, both of which
lack competent, dynamic regional public transport agencies.

And ...

3. Brisbane: mixed performance

Brisbane now has the second-lowest share of workers travelling as car drivers. This is more a
reflection of Melbourne's rapid decline in performance than Brisbane's inherent success.
However, there have been improvements in mode share for public transport and walking in the
last decade, and there are some signs of hope for continued positive trends.

Long-established management arrangements, under which buses were operated by the Brisbane
City Council and private firms, while trains were the responsibility of Queensland Rail, have
been an entrenched obstacle to public transport service improvements. In recent years, there
have been changes to this structure, beginning in 2004 with the establishment of Translink, a
coordinating body for public transport across South East Queensland. Translink's first major
achievement was the introduction in 2005 of a fully multi-modal ticketing system (without
smart-cards, a message that appears not to have registered in Sydney), which led to an
immediate and substantial jump in patronage across all public transport modes, and is a major
factor behind the one per cent rise in mode share between 2001 and 2006.

The Queensland Premier announced on 9 October 2007 that a new regional public transport
agency will be established for South East Queensland in 2008, incorporating Translink's
functions plus responsibility for rail and bus services across greater Brisbane. The new agency
has the potential to create integrated services to match the integrated fare system, provided it is
established with a dynamic, European-style management and planning culture, rather than
simply being 'business as usual' under a different title.

Transport investment decisions in South East Queensland have worked against the recent
improvements in public transport mode share. Rail extensions and service enhancements have
been placed on the 'back-burner' despite rapid growth in patronage. One reason is substantial
investment in a series of busways, which largely parallel the existing rail system. A more
serious concern is the still larger diversion of investment funds to an extensive program of
motorways, tunnels and bridges, which will directly compete with the rail and busway systems
for customers.

[Golliwog]

Accessibility of public transport is also a major factor. The whole parking at stations thing is a good example of this, if there were decent feeder services, these most likely wouldn't be there (although they could from people who are outside a feeder buses catchment). A lot of new neighbourhoods are not pedestrain permeable, so it becomes a lot harder for residents to walk to the nearest bus stop, especially when this lack of permeability also affects buses due to things like dead end branches that buses can't turn around in, or narrow windy roads that makes bus travel times high.

[ozbob]

TT, Census data can be accessed here!

[ozbob]

So, expansion of the rail network in terms of network and frequency, will lead to an increase in PT mode share, not only for rail but bus and to a lesser extent active transport.  Perth has managed to do this despite the lack of Federal funding, the other states went into rail paralysis.

There are signs that the message might be getting through though (although events like today's hysterical celebration of the horseless carriage do cause one to perhaps despair a little).  Cross River Rail, the other network expansions planned and in a small way already under way are a sign.  The bluster and spin out of George St has not yet fully translated into action absolute.  It is our task to constantly remind them that it should ...

[Golliwog]

Interesting fact: If you look at the Inner Brisbane Statistical Subdivision for 2006, 33.54% either walked, rode a bicycle or caught public transport to work. If you look at the same figures for the whole Brisbane Statistical Division, that figure drops to 13.84%

If you include those who use a combination of car (and the 'other' section (assuming this includes walking, bicycles, etc)) and public transport (which I would assume would be those who drive to stations, etc) then these percentages increase to 40.11% and 16.05% respectively.

I can't compare this backwards though as Inner Brisbane is not a listed subdivision until 2006. The numbers I used were from the "Method of Travel to Work by Occupation" category.

[cartoonbirdhaus]

Accessibility of public transport is also a major factor. The whole parking at stations thing is a good example of this, if there were decent feeder services, these most likely wouldn't be there (although they could from people who are outside a feeder buses catchment). A lot of new neighbourhoods are not pedestrain permeable, so it becomes a lot harder for residents to walk to the nearest bus stop

Very true. A lot more suburban development needs to be like this area in Eight Mile Plains, where walkways continue beyond road cul-de-sacs, and there's a frequent bus service nearby. (There should be signage as well, to aid navigation and make people aware of nearby public transport options.) The excellent blog Human Transit has a recent article dealing with this very issue.

[Jon Bryant]

I would add:
- walkable, mix density/use suburbs
- reduced car parking availability
- dedicated bike paths on every main road
- bus lane in same said roads as well
- networked system so jumping off and on different routes is the norm and allows people to move around the city
- reduced road capacity

EDIT: - priority given to walking, cycling and PT
- advertising campaign similar to water restriction to highlight benefits of changing travel behaviour
- recognize that current infrastructure is making congestion worse.
- fund walking to school program
- remove FBT benefits on business cars
- add FBT deduction on PT
 

[#Metro]

I don't always agree with Dr Mees views, but generally he is on the right track.

3. Brisbane: mixed performance

Brisbane now has the second-lowest share of workers travelling as car drivers. This is more a
reflection of Melbourne's rapid decline in performance than Brisbane's inherent success.
However, there have been improvements in mode share for public transport and walking in the
last decade, and there are some signs of hope for continued positive trends.

Long-established management arrangements, under which buses were operated by the Brisbane
City Council and private firms, while trains were the responsibility of Queensland Rail, have
been an entrenched obstacle to public transport service improvements. In recent years, there
have been changes to this structure, beginning in 2004 with the establishment of Translink, a
coordinating body for public transport across South East Queensland. Translink's first major
achievement was the introduction in 2005 of a fully multi-modal ticketing system (without
smart-cards, a message that appears not to have registered in Sydney), which led to an
immediate and substantial jump in patronage across all public transport modes, and is a major
factor behind the one per cent rise in mode share between 2001 and 2006.

The Queensland Premier announced on 9 October 2007 that a new regional public transport
agency will be established for South East Queensland in 2008, incorporating Translink's
functions plus responsibility for rail and bus services across greater Brisbane. The new agency
has the potential to create integrated services to match the integrated fare system, provided it is
established with a dynamic, European-style management and planning culture, rather than
simply being 'business as usual' under a different title.

Transport investment decisions in South East Queensland have worked against the recent
improvements in public transport mode share. Rail extensions and service enhancements have
been placed on the 'back-burner' despite rapid growth in patronage. One reason is substantial
investment in a series of busways, which largely parallel the existing rail system. A more
serious concern is the still larger diversion of investment funds to an extensive program of
motorways, tunnels and bridges, which will directly compete with the rail and busway systems

Melbourne's rail patronage is increasing in leaps and bounds. Integrated ticketing gives a 1% mode share gain, goodie!
I wonder what capping might do then?

The new agency
has the potential to create integrated services to match the integrated fare system, provided it is
established with a dynamic, European-style management and planning culture, rather than
simply being 'business as usual' under a different title.

Hahahahah. I wonder what mufreight's opinion is on this paragraph!!!

a series of busways, which largely parallel the existing rail system.

IMHO this is nonsense. Draw any line in brisbane and it will be parallel to something.

[ButFli]

Where LA is in the diagram is a bit of a surprise!

Is it? Where it is fits with my expectations. It looks like about 11% use public transport.

Don't forget that it is only a very small portion of LA that fits with the glamourised version we see on TV. Less than half the population are white.

[#Metro]

Brisbane is worse than LA with 8% IIRC!!

[longboi]

Brisbane is worse than LA with 8% IIRC!!

What definition are they using for LA? If it is just the city proper I could believe that.