An open letter to Oslo Sporveier and Oslo BystyreAv Mikko Laaksonen, Turku, Finland
Advice from Turku, Finland, a city that abandoned its trams - Do not abandon tram lines, it will cost you dearly
As a resident of Turku, Finland, which abandoned its tramways 1967-72 and as the author of the study "Light Rail Transit in the Turku Region". I would like to offer some advice to the Oslo Sporveier and Oslo Bystyre regarding the proposal to abandon tram traffic in Oslo on stretches: Storo - Kjelsås, Trondheimsveien, Briskeby and Homansbyen, in line kilometres 42% of the whole Oslo tram network.
The proposal and the arguments presented for them are grounded on the ideas of the early 1980's and ignore most of the developments in existing, built and planned new tramway systems for the last 20 years.
Do not abandon tramlines, because you will regret it later. You will lose passengers and income, destroy infrastructure and rolling stock of considerable value, and in fact your operational economy will suffer. Below, I will develop my arguments in more detail.
Abandonment of tram lines in the proposed scale would be a scandal with repercussions to the international reputation of the City of Oslo. Like other major Nordic cities which have abandoned their tram networks: Bergen, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Turku and Århus, you would in future regret your decision and try to reverse it. But it would cost a lot more to rebuild tram lines than to refurbish and extend existing lines.
The existing problems in operational economy can only be solved through an offensive strategy that requires sufficient subsidies and investment funds for the Oslo public transit.
Yours sincerely,
Mikko Laaksonen
mikala@utu.fi
Kristiinankatu 2 aB 21
20100 Turku
Finland
A: Operational economy Bus / Tram
In the argumentation presented by Oslo Sporveier it has been claimed that trams are less economical than buses or metro. It is especially curious that it is claimed that metro - which is in principle just tramway on wholly segregated track - is more economical than trams. There is a basic fault in Oslo Sporveier's cost figures, even though
they are actual production costs.Oslo Sporveier has not presented its costs with the ordinary method that is recommended by UITP, which uses the following cost factors:
- Car day: The buying price of a car and possible renovations calculated as depreciation per day over the lifetime of a car (for a tram car or metro car 25-40 years, for a bus 10-15 years).
- Car hour: The costs of a driver (the same for bus, tram and metro they pay and the benefits are the same) per hour.
- Car kilometre: Electricity / fuel, daily upkeep and repairs per kilometre.With this method, different lines and traffic forms can be compared analytically. In analysis, there are following factors which improve the operational economy:
- Commercial speed: If a line is relatively fast, economy is improved because a car and a driver can transport more people per hour or per day. Therefore, reserved lanes and priority in traffic signals and segregated sections improve operational economy drastically.
- Capacity: With a tram or metro car more people can be transported per car and per driver. If there are enough passengers, costs per passenger are lowered if bus is replaced by tram or metro.
- Attractivity: Rail transit attracts always more passengers. If bus is replaced by rail transit, 20-50% more passengers can be expected and then capacity will be used better.
- Lifetime economy: With good upkeep and renovations a tram car can be kept in good condition for 30-40 years and this reduces the car day costs.Due to these factors, trams are always more economical than buses on agiven line if there are enough passengers.
Problems with Oslo's inner city and street tram lines are probably caused most by:
- Low commerical speed due to lack of reserved lanes and priorities in traffic signals.
- High costs of new SL95 cars as they were taken in service, which should become lower when all "child illnesses" of the cars are cured and the capital costs level out.Another problem is poor economy on parallel bus lines, which do not have enough passengers as all who can will take the tram.
Oslo Sporveier has hoped to solve these problems with abandoning 42% of Oslo's tram lines. This is not possible, and the replacing bus lines will be hopelessly uneconomical because of the following factors:
- Trams have always better commercial speed in the same traffic environment (even without priorities) because trams accelerate better than buses and car drivers respect trams more than buses. Therefore, replacing buses will have 5-15% lower commercial speeds than the trams they would replace.
- The bus lines will have about 20-30% less passengers than the tram lines.
- Because of the lower capacity of the buses, more drivers and cars will be required to operate the same line with more costs as a result.It must be emphasized that buses in no way can solve problems in traffic flow! Oslo's present (suburban)bus lines are economical because in the most problematic inner city area with its traffic jams passengers use trams and metro. In the inner city the operational economy cannot ever be as good as in the suburbs! Problems in operational economy of the inner city lines must be solved by improving the priorities for the trams.
B: Trams on streets and in inner cities
It has been claimed by those who support Oslo Sporveier's abandonment proposal that no tram lines on streets or in the inner cities are constructed nowadays.
It is actually so that in certain cities, such as Stuttgart, Hannover, Köln-Bonn and on the Ruhr area in Germany and in Charleroi in Belgium tramways have been built in the 1980's and 1990's with high costs to "light rail" or "stadtbahn" through replacing street sections with tunnels and segregated sections. Also some of the first new tramways, such as Newcastle in England, Edmonton in Canada, Rouen in France and Buffalo in the USA were built with similar principles.
However, it has been recently realized, that if the traffic is not totally jammed on the surface, almost as good commercial speeds can be achieved with tram lanes, traffic signal priority and other less costly practices, which cost only 10-50% of building tram lines in tunnel or on bridge. It has also been realized how important for both the appeal of the tram and the shops it is to locate trams on the commercial streets. For these reasons on-street tramlines - often with dedicated lanes and
always with traffic signal priority - have been employed succesfully and often in Strasbourg, Grenoble, Nantes and other new French tramways, in Croydon in England and on Stockholm's Tvärbanan at Gröndal and Hammarby Sjöstad.In an inner city environment trams are always faster than buses because trams accelerate better, cars give trams space in traffic and trams can go on pedestrianized streets and through parks and squares.
New lines in inner city street environment have been planned in the following cities:
- In HELSINKI, FINLAND the new inner city tram line 9 from Ilmala to Ullanlinna will replace two inner city bus lines, 17 and 23 to save operational costs and increase ridership and ticket sales. The first section is between Ullanlinna and Pasila is expected to open in 2005.
- In PORTLAND, OREGON, USA, the new inner city tram Portland Streetcar has been an immediate success.
- In BOSTON, MASS. USA, the Arborway line E will be rebuilt as the buses which replaced the streetcars in 1987 do not cope with the traffic load, attract 30% less passengers, are not able to negotiate traffic jams and the local community wants the trams back! See: www.arborway.net
- In LONDON, ENGLAND, inner city trams will be revived as the CrossRiver Transit in the eastern city centre.
- In GOTHENBURG, SWEDEN, new inner city tram links have allowed for new tram lines to connect the different sides of the city, with 20-30% rise in the total ridership, without adding virtually any new stops to the system!It is a mistake to claim that no new tram lines in street environment of inner cities are built or planned. Oslo Sporveier uses 20 year old principles from Germany in when planning to use trams only as "light rail".
And to understand what the difference of bus and tram in the inner city transit, please take a ride on the Trunk bus (Stomlinje) bus 4 in Stockholm and Tram 4 in Helsinki, so you will note a certain difference in speed and comfort!
C: How many passengers will Oslo Sporveier lose if it abandons the tram lines?
In most cities which have built new tram lines or new tram systems, high rises in transit passengers have been reported. Typical figures are about 20-50% but in most succesful projects and in cities with previously very poor public transit, figures have been even 70-100%.
What is less known is that in cities which have abandoned tram lines, similar events have occurred in the reverse direction, that is, that when trams have been replaced by buses, public transit ridership has fallen considerably.
I will examine the case of my hometown, Turku, in more detail. Turku abandoned its tram lines in stages between 1967-1972. The trams were replaced by buses and the service quality remained roughly at the same level - old trams were replaced by brand-new buses, frequency was kept the same and commercial speeds were not reduced significantly as there were no real traffic jams in Turku.
When the first tram line, no. 1 Harbour - Pohjola (5,2 km) was closed in 12.3.1967 and replaced with a longer bus line 1 Harbour - Rieskalähteentie (5,7 km) the transit loadings changed in the following manner when we compare 1966 and 1968, the full years before and after the tram closure:
1966: 2 578 000
1968: 2 012 000
Passenger loss caused by change to the bus calculated by the 1968 boardings.
= - 21,9%, compensated for the line length = -28,8%
Additional passengers attracted by tram in 1966 compared to bus in 1968 ( the "rail factor"):
= +28,1%, compensated for the line length =+40,45%Similar figures cannot be calculated for the closure of lines 2 and 3 as the detailed information for the replacing bus lines is not available due to change in ticket system.
The observation from Turku is supported by several similar observations from cities that have abandoned trams or tram lines and substituted them by buses, such as Copenhagen or Stockholm. In all instances, the substituting bus lines have had brand-new buses and similar frequencies as trams. On the basis of this experience, it can be estimated that Oslo would probably lose about 20-30% of the passengers and the ticket sales of the tram lines threatened with closure if it replaces the trams with high quality bus line.
D: In other Nordic countries people want to have trams back or more trams!
Several Nordic cities are planning to build new tramways or expand their tram networks considerably.
The most concrete projects just now are:
BERGEN, NORWAY
Construction of a 20 - km tramway is due to start in 2004 and first stretch is to be operational by 2006.
http://www.bergen.kommune.no/bybane/GOTHENBURG, SWEDEN
The highly succesful tram system has been boosted by the "Kringen" links in the city centre and the new links have already attracted numerous new passengers.
http://www.trafikkontoret.goteborg.se/kringen/html/pc/new2.htmlHELSINKI, ESPOO AND VANTAA, FINLAND
In inner Helsinki, the new tram line 9 will replace the bus 17 by 2005 and bus 23 later. Studies for regional light rail lines are underway in co-operation of the municipalities of Espoo, Helsinki and Vantaa. For Espoo, see
http://www.espoo.fi/xsl_perussivu_alasivuilla.asp?path=1;606;608;642;3491;3565;9877;1865STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN
The highly succesful semicircular tram line connecting the suburbs, opened 1999-2002 will be extended considerably to a regional light railsystem.
http://www.sl.se/trafik/tvarbanan/TAMPERE, FINLAND
In Finland's second largest urban region, Tam-Train, a study for tram-train type tramways with both tram sections and use of existing rail lines in the Tampere region, is due for completion by end of 2002.
http://www.tampere.fi/projekti/raideliikenne/index.htmTURKU, FINLAND
In Finlan's third largest urban region "Light rail transit in Turku Region", a study covering 42 km of new tramways connecting the neighboring towns of Kaarina, Naantali and Raisio and the suburbs of Runosmäki and Varissuo has been completed by May 2002. The study is under political discussion, and it has been already decided to reserve right-of-way in the city planning. The most relevant section to be considered for built if state and EU financing can be gained is probably the 20-km section Raisio-Turku-Kaarina.
http://www.turku.fi/ympakaavi/toimistot/Kaavoitus/sivut/Yleiskaavoitus/sivut/Yleiskaavoituksen_osaselvitykset.php?content=PikaraitiotieselvitysOther cities where tramways have been discussed seriously, include Copenhagen (DK), Helsingborg (SWE), Malmö (SWE), Reykjavik (IS) and Västerås (SWE). Smaller extensions are projected for the tramways in Norrköping (SWE) and Trondheim (NOR)
E: Summary and advice
As an independent expert, I have following advice for Oslo Sporveier, Oslo Bystyre and Norges Storting.
1. Do not abandon tram lines
On basis of European and American experience, the suggested tram line abandonments would have the following effects.
- Passengers and ticket sales will be decreased by 20-30% on those lines which are driven with bus instead of trams. This can lead also to traffic volume reductions on other connected lines in the order of 5-10%.
- Commercial speeds of public transit are reduced in the order of 5-15% when trams are replaced with buses, which leads to increased costs as more cars and drivers are needed to negotiate the line.
- These two reasons cause that the hoped cost reductions are not achieved as costs rise and incomes shrink at the same proportion as other costs are reduced.
- In the rest of the tramway network operational economy is worsned because of worse economy of scale in maintenance and repairs in workshops and a larger proportion of reserve cars required.
- In the whole traffic environment traffic jams increase as private car use increases.
- The tram line abandonments cause an economical destruction of infrastructure and rolling stock fot hundreds of millions of crowns.2. Instead, invest in the tramway for better operational economy
The following investments in tramways should give much improved operational economy.
- Extend the tram network so that parallel and overlapping bus lines can be abandoned (like Helsinki and Gothenburg)
- Improve commercial speeds with a radio controlled traffic light priority and own reserved lanes wherever plausible. (like Helsinki and Gothenburg)
- Rebuild tram litt. SL79 with a low-floor section (like Gothenburg and Norrköping and like Helsinki plans to do) to get big low-floor cars with cost of about 10% of a SL 95. SL79 can be used economically for about 20 years.
- If some track sections have too many departures compared to boardings, replace existing two lines with 15-minute intervals with a single line with 10-minute intervals.3. Go out to see for yourself
I suggest the following study trips for Oslo Bystyre and the board of Oslo Sporveier.
- To HELSINKI to see how inner city tramways can be cheaply modernized and expanded, and money is spared through improved traffic flow and abandonment of parallel bus lines.
- To GOTHENBURG and NORRKÖPING to see how 15-20 years old trams can be rebuilt and expanded for low floor and improved capacity.
- To GOTHENBURG to see how with new links and improved traffic flow 20-30% more passengers can be attracted to an existing tram system.
- To STOCKHOLM to see that on-street tramway can be a part of a hypermodern tramway.
- To STRASBOURG, SAARBRÜCKEN, KARLSRUHE and FREIBURG IM BREISGAU (all can be reached on the same round trip) to see what modern "light rail" can actually be.
- To BOSTON and PHILADELPHIA to see how abandoned parts of tramway must be rebuilt and taken to service because buses attract 30% less passengers, are uneconomical, cannot negotiate traffic jams and local residents want their streetcars back!