1. Eidgenössisches Departement für Umwelt, Verkehr, Energie und Kommunikation UVEK Bundesamt für Raumentwicklung Public Transport from the Standpoint of Spatial Development and Agglomeration Policy Ueli Balmer Deputy Head Transport Policy Section Office for Spatial Development Switzerland

2. 2 Summer School 23.08.2010 Switzerland in brief - Comparatively small - 40’000km 2 (Germany 360’000 km 2 ) - 7.7 Mio. people (Germany 82 Mio.) - Unfavorable geography (2/3 mountainous) - Situated in center of Europe - 3’900’000 (523 per 1000 inhabitants) - Roads: 72’000 km - Railway lines: 5’000 km - Air: 3 international airports

3. 3 Summer School 23.08.2010 Starting Point Community of Ferenbalm asks for better connectivity by PT Background Revision of local planning Canton demands accessibility by PT Canton Responsible for spatial planning Guidelines by Federal Law on Spatial Planning Karte Gem. Ferenbalm

4. 4 Summer School 23.08.2010 Federal Law on Spatial Planning Intentions Main intentions Seperation of Settlement and non settlement areas Economical use of landscape Specific measures to support Conservation of nature Good conditions for settlements and economy Develop social, economical and cultural life in different regions Adequate decentralisation of settlement and economy Ensure sufficient provision Ensure integral defense Conclusion: Satisfy diverging interests

5. 5 Summer School 23.08.2010 Law on Spatial Planning Specifications Obligation of planning Specification of planning principles Protection of landscape Limitation of extension of settlements Sufficient connectivity of Residential zones and Working zones by PT Maintenance and construction of ways for cycling and walking Etc. Basic lines of planning have to be accepted by Office for Spatial Development (examination) Federal Government (final)

6. 6 Summer School 23.08.2010 Effects on Traffic Volume: Limited

7. 7 Summer School 23.08.2010 Explanation: Diverging Incentives Dense infrastructure (road and rail) Mobility is cheap Individual motor car traffic does not pay for external costs Public transport heavily subsidised Tax reductions when using the car for journey to work (if use of PT is not « reasonable ») Deficits in spatial planning Building in open Country Settlements Working Places Shopping Centres Partially no or unsufficient access to PT

8. 8 Summer School 23.08.2010 Specific Challenge Transport in Urban Areas Speed reduction of >5% due to increase of Road traffic till 2030 85-90% of Congestion located in Urban Areas

9. 9 Summer School 23.08.2010 Is Public Transport the Solution?

10. 10 Summer School 23.08.2010 The Example of Zurich

11. 11 Summer School 23.08.2010 Suburban railway system of Zurich Concept and effects Access improved: Connections at least every 30’ for 60% of the workplaces 1/3 of the population of the catchment area Co-determining factors Integral system with tramways and buses Parking policy (in Zurich restricitve) Capacity of road infrastructure Outcome: Success-story Before: Increase of motorised transport absorbed by road After: Increase absorbed by public transport

12. 12 Summer School 23.08.2010 Further important findings Development of settlements shaped by motorway system Suburban railway system followed Is now driver for development of region and Gives incentives for Economical use of landscape Concentration of development of settlements (near stations) But: Bearing on development limited: Depending on actions of stakeholders Tax-level, location, existing structure of settlements Outcome: Mean for better management of development

13. 13 Summer School 23.08.2010 Swisswide Approach: Infrastructure Fund Main aim of fund: Tackling congestion Different aspects Completion of (planned) motorway network Extension of motorway network at neuralgic links Co-Funding of projects for urban and suburban transport Contributions for maintenance of peripheral roads Funding: Initial deposit from revenues of earmarked excise duties Annual contributions of earmarked excise duties Expenses Total: 1 Bio CHF (about 650 Mio. €) per year (average) For urban areas: 300 Mio. (about 200 Mio. €) per year

14. 14 Summer School 23.08.2010 Urban Areas: Requirements for Funding Link to Agglomeration Program indicating: Participation of relevant stakeholders Empowered governing body Analysis of current land use and traffic flows Transparency of cost estimations and consequences proposed Secured implementation and controlling High efficiency for different criteria Contributions of local/cantonal bodies (min. 50%)

15. 15 Summer School 23.08.2010 Urban Areas: Assessment/effectiveness criteria 1. Qualitative improvement of transport systems 2. Promotion of inward settlement development 3. Increase in traffic safety 4. Reduced envir. impact & resource consumption 5. Acceptable investment and operating costs

16. 16 Summer School 23.08.2010 Urban Areas: Method of assessment of programmes Agglomeratio n submitted agglomeration programmes conditions are not complied conditions are complied Assessment of the programm’s impact order of priority of the different measures 50% Measures List A Measures List B Agglomeration Transport : AP X :AP Y : -M1- M1 -M2- M2 -…- … Analysis level of basic requirement 45% 40% 30% 35%

17. 17 Summer School 23.08.2010 Outlook: Further steps necessary Spatial planning important, but diverging interests Develop social, economical and cultural life in different regions Adequate decentralisation of settlement and economy Upgrading of public transport important, but not sufficient Private transport increases as well Financial means limited Additional measures needed Pricing policy? Report on Road Pricing – RP for Urban Areas Mobility Pricing – pay as you drive

18. 18 Summer School 23.08.2010 Mobility Pricing Example Heavy Vehicle Fee Vehicles with admissible Weight > 3.5t For Use of all Roads Polluter pays principle - Fee-Calculation includes external costs Performance-related Distance Weight (Vehicle and Trailer) Emissions (Situation since 2009) Euro 0/1/2: 2,0 €Cts/tkm Euro 3: 1,8 €Cts/tkm Euro 4-6: 1.5 €Cts/tkm In parallel: Increase of weight limit from 28 to 40 tonnes

19. 19 Summer School 23.08.2010 Effects of new regime on driving performance

20. 20 Summer School 23.08.2010 Conclusions Public transport plays an essential role in spatial planning Backbone for transport in urban areas (agglomerations) Basic offer in countryside Law on Spatial Planning aiming for connectivity by PT but Diverging interests (deconcentration) Execution by Cantons Controversial incentives (tax-system) Specific Regulation for urban areas Agglomeration programs Special funding Public transport important but not sufficient Planning needs to become more rigid and better controled Additional measures needed – Pricing measures