K 2012 Summary

Home , Alna Line, Bergen Light Rail, Eidsvoll, Ekebergbanen (company), Enebakk, Flateby

Ruter Report 2012:1 1.3.2012

K 2012 Summary

Public Transport for Oslo and Akershus Ruter’s Business Plan 2012–2060

K 2012 7

Ruter

Ruter As is the public transport (PT) authority for the City of Oslo and Akershus County. Ruter is a limited company, and Oslo and Akershus hold 60% and 40 % of the shares respectively. Ruter is the regional body of PT competence. Its main tasks are the planning, management, tendering and marketing of PT services in the Oslo region. The terms of reference for Ruter’s activity are defined in agreements with The City of Oslo and Akershus County, and are intended to ensure that Ruter contributes to the fulfilment of its owners’ transport policy goals.

Ruter serves close to 300 million passengers each year. This represents nearly 60 % of all PT journeys in Norway. Key figures for 2011 may be found on this page. For further information, we refer to Ruter’s annual reports and other reports and information (in Norwegian) at www.ruter.no.

Total number of passengers, Oslo and Akershus 291 mill Passenger kilometres, Ruter 1 636 mill Traffic increase 2010-2011 5,5 % Bus passengers 126 mill Metro passengers 81 mill Tram passengers 48 mill Railway passengers, Ruter tickets (NSB) 27 mill Railway passengers, Airport Express Train 6 mill Ferry passengers 4 mill

Residents in Oslo and Akershus 1,2 mill Market share (motorised) region 31 % Market share (motorised) Oslo 44 % Market share (motorised) Akershus 20 % Customers’ satisfaction 92 %

Right of way kilometres (Metro, tram, bus) 3 324 Departures (Metro, tram, bus) 3 605 000 Vehicle kilometres in service (Metro, tram, bus) 82 mill Seat/standing kilometres in service (Metro, tram, bus) 7012 mill Average load factor, standing included (Metro, tram, buss) 23,3 %

Turnover 5 595 NOK mill (750 € mill) Tickets revenues 2 866 NOK mill (385 € mill) Grant and funding 2 564 NOK mill (345 € mill)

Solvency (equity ratio) 15 % Illustrations: Truls Lange: page 2, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16, 17, 19 Energy use Ruter 414 GWh Placebo Effects: page 18 Environmental cost/passenger km PT users Photos: 0.22 NOK (0,03 €) CatchLight Fotostudio: Cover, page 4, 7, 15 Environmental cost/passenger km car users Ruter: page 14 0.96 NOK (0,13 €)

8 K 2012

Content

This report is an English summary of Ruter’s Business Plan 2012-2060, Report 2011:10. (In Norwegian: K2012. Ruters strategiske kollektivtrafikkplan 2012-2060.)

More PT customers and an increasing market share in the Oslo region 4

1 Ruter aims to have more and better satisfied customers, and a bigger market share 6

2 Ruter aims to develop increased capacity as a means of capturing the greater part of future growth in motorised transport – as a contribution to environmental sustainability 8

3 Ruter aims to safeguard values and prioritise a reliable transport network 10

4 Ruter aims to consolidate its trunk network with the construction of two new city centre Metro and railway tunnels, linked together with effective interchange hubs 11

5 Ruter aims to make its tram services more modern and efficient by, among other things, the introduction of new, high-capacity, light rail routes 12

6 Ruter aims to optimise its bus services by directing greater focus on new market opportunities 13

7 Ruter aims to develop cost-effective operation and an optimised Ruter network 14

8 Ruter aims to modernise its sales channels 15

9 Ruter aims to be accessible, and intends to give priority to the implementation of its traffic information services 16

10 Ruter recommends a higher degree of state involvment in public transport in the Oslo metropolitan area 17

Ruter Reports 23

K 2012 9 More PT customers and an increasing market share in the Oslo region

Trends 2000–2011. Index: 2000=100

140 Passengers on PT, 135 Oslo

130 Passengers on PT, Akershus

125

120 Car traffic, Akershus Population, 115 Oslo and Akershus

110

105 Car traffic, Oslo

100

90 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Public transport’s share of motorised transport

2011 44% 2010 45% 2009 42% 2008 41% Oslo 2007 37% 2006 36%

2011 20% 2010 18% 2009 17% 2008 15% Akershus 2007 14% 2006 14%

2011 31% 2010 31% 2009 29% Ruter 2008 27% 2007 25% 2006 24%

Ruter aims to capture the greater part of growth in The planning initiatives behind this recent positive devel- motorised journeys in the Oslo region. Over the last years opment are described in Oslo Sporveier’s and later Ruter’s we have succeeded well. Car traffic in Oslo is still on the strategic plans K2009, K2010 and K2012. Ruter follows up 2005 level, whilst 44 % uses PT. In 2011 the market share for the targets set by the Oslo City Council and the Akershus regional Akershus journeys reached 20 %. The yearly rise County Council and the possibilities shaped by new funding in number of passengers is at a high level, due to growth in from the Oslo Toll Ring through the co-operation project population in combination with the increased market share. Oslo Package 3. The total subsidy share in 2011 was 46 %. Ruter had 5,5 % more passengers in 2011 than in 2010. The main measures are increased frequency for metro, At the same time population increased by more than 2 %. tram, city buses and trunk lines in the regional bus network. Oslo is the fastest growing among the bigger European cities New metro trains offer higher capacity, comfort and (2011: + 2,35 %). reliability.

4 K 2012

Summary

K 2012 5 1. Ruter aims to have more and better satisfied customers, and a bigger market share

Ruter aims to be a customer-driven organisation which 100% Walking distance Walking distance home develops, markets and communicates its transport place of work services on the basis of an increasingly greater awareness 80% Comfort Frequency of its customers’ preferences. Ruter aims to provide Punctuality Seating Point-to-point journey (no transfer) 60% its customers in the Oslo metropolitan area with a PT Connection waiting time network which is coordinated, integrated, user-friendly and Standard at stops 40% efficient, enabling us to capture market shares from car Fares Degree of satisfactionDegree HIGH users. Ruter’s business concept, vision, values, customer 20% guarantees, positional targets and overall strategic goals LOW can be summarised by the following: 0% Ruter aims to have more and better satisfied customers, and a LOW Importance HIGH bigger share of the public transport market. There is broad agreement that the targets related to The resident population’s satisfaction with individual market share can be stated as follows: quality-related factors seen in the context of the signifi- Public transport shall capture the greater part of future cance of collective satisfaction with PT services. growth in motorised journeys. More public transport for our money Ruter’s development and follow-up work is carried out As part of our analyses of service alterations we employ within politically-determined terms of reference governing our knowledge of satisfaction levels and their significance transport policy and finances. The aim of achieving more and as input to the model. “Frequent departures” is the most better satisfied customers represents a common point of important factor for the majority of our customers. Fares departure as much in relation to political transport-related are less important to the average customer than service goals as for Ruter’s own priorities and efforts linked to its frequency. Customers’ satisfaction with walking distance to day-to-day activities and strategic planning. the stop indicates that we can continue our work to combine On the basis of these strategic goals, the key elements different routes onto fewer lines. In this way we achieve are an awareness both of our customers’ levels of satis- better service frequency, while at the same time increased faction and preferences and a knowledge of the factors distance between stops enables us to achieve faster journey which really influence their choice of means of transport. speeds and lower costs. Ruter is employing a number of approaches towards finding An understanding of our customers’ average priorities out about our customers’ levels of satisfaction and their and their consequences is supplemented by a knowledge of preferences: customer categories. In 2011, to support this work, Ruter • Feedback from front-line personnel carried out a new customer segmentation survey. Each • Verbal and written customer responses communicated segment consists of customers with approximately similar to Ruter or the information service Trafikanten, including attitudes, behaviours and needs. An adequate segmentation those via social media such as Facebook and Twitter and differentiation provides the basis for optimal devel- • On board customer satisfaction interviews – a total of opment, marketing and sales activities. 30,000 annually As many as 94% of people over 15 years of age living in • Surveys among the resident population collected the region are Ruter’s customers. Every fourth customer throughout the year, regardless of whether they travel by belongs to the challenging “CONVINCE ME” segment. They public transport or not – comprising 6,000 interviews normally have the use of a car and travel by PT only half • “Before and after” interviews in connection with the as often as the average. Together with “ENLIGHTENED introduction of major service alterations FRIENDS” they display a flexible and calculating attitude, • Conjoint analyses which provide a quantitative weighting and represent a much greater growth potential for public K 2012 38 of the significance of quality-related factors transport use than the “ME AND MY CAR” segment. • Benchmarking metropolitan areas and PT authorities Alongside our focus on development and market-related • Research carried out in Norway and overseas. work linked to those segments with large growth potential, Ruter also intends to take good care of its loyal users; the “AMBASSADORS” and “MY ONLY OPTION”.

6 K 2012 K2012 Summary 1 Sammendrag

16 segmenteringsmodell og kundesegmenter

AMBASSADORSAMbAssAdører MYMitt ONLY Altern OPTIONAtiv areer fanatical kollektivtrafikkens about PT and fans proud og erof it.stolte Ambassadors av det! Ambassa are urban,- areer dependent avhengig avon kollektivtilbudet, PT on a daily basis da becausede har valgt they å have ikke chosen dørene er urbane, uten bil og trives svært godt med å ha have no car, and get great enjoyment from having PT as their notdisponere to have the bil. use kollektivreisen of a car. PT is er not ikke necessarily nødvendigvis their en preferred kollektivtransport som sitt primære fremkomstmiddel. preferert reiseform, men en konsekvens av mangel på main means of getting about. meansalternativer. of travel, but a consequence of a lack of other options.

ENLIGHTENEDbevisste venner FRIENDS CONVINCEOverbevis ME Meg areer both både car- bil- and og kollektivbasert.PT-based. They daree er satisfied fornøyde userskollektiv of -PT, havehar easy kollektivtilbudet access to PT, lett but tilgjengelig, use it only sporadically. men benytter The det car is brukere bevisste på kombinasjonsbruk bil/kollektivtran- lite. Bilen oppfattes som mer komfortabel og praktisk. fully aware of the possibilities of combining car use with public perceived as more comfortable and practical. However, this sport, og velger beste løsning ift hver reisesituasjon. segmentet er imidlertid åpne for å lytte til hva kollektiv- services, and select the option that best suits them in any given segmenttransport is willing kan gjøre to listen for dem. to what PT has to offer them. travel situation.

MEMeg AND O MYg Min CAR bil NON-USERSikke kOllektivt areer virtually nesten utelukkendeexclusively car-based. bilbasert. BilenThe car oppleves is perceived som et as the travelreiser rarely sjelden or never eller aldri by PT, kollektivt either on av principleprinsipp eller or because mangel riktig, komfortabelt og praktisk valg, mens kollektivtran- på tilgjengelighet. Består av 52.000 personer som primært right, comfortable and practical option, while PT is regarded as of lack of access. Represented by 52,000 people who are not sport betegnes som et lite attraktivt og aktuelt alternativ. bor i Akershus øst eller nord. er ikke del av segmenterings- unattractive and of little relevance. incorporatedmodellen. into the segmentation model. A segmentation of Ruter’s market into customer groups displaying similar attitudes, behaviours and needs

K 2012 7 2. Ruter aims to develop increased capacity as a means of capturing the greater part of future growth in motorised transport – as a contribution to environmental sustainability

An infrastructure for at least 750,000 new residents and a we face is that the joint regional planning project is limited tripling of PT use strictly to Oslo and Akershus, whereas the decisions made In recent years, Oslo has become perhaps Europe’s regarding transport projects should be seen in the context most rapidly growing metropolitan area. A wide range of of the entire operational Oslo metropolitan area. It is for this prognoses agree that this growth will continue. A population reason that both as part of the K2012 report, and to an even concentration is occurring around the major conurbations – greater degree in connection with the NTP work, the greater in particular in the Oslo metropolitan area, where it seems part of central south-eastern Norway is incorporated in that districts adjacent to the fjord will become especially the analysis. In K2012 this applies in particular to regions attractive. of Østfold and Buskerud counties, and contact has been Ruter’s projected 50-year analyses are closely coordi- established with the operating company Buskerud kolle- nated with those of the Norwegian National Transport ktivtrafikk, the joint transport and environmental project Plan (NTP), prepared in collaboration with the Norwegian Buskerudbyen, and Røyken and Hurum municipalities. National Rail Administration and the Norwegian Public Among the strategic approaches addressed as part of Roads Administration, among others. The operative Oslo the joint regional planning project, Ruter has provisionally metropolitan area, which in addition to Oslo and Akershus opted to focus on the towns, rail-connected towns and also includes parts of adjacent counties, in particular the major hubs. From a purely rational transport system Buskerud and Østfold, is projected to have a population of perspective, the preferred option would involve opting for 2.5 million residents. An increase of 750,000 is anticipated an even more focused alternative, based on the towns. in Oslo and Akershus alone, which will result in a total However, Ruter anticipates that by including the connected population of 1.9 million in these areas. PT’s aim of capturing towns and certain new, well-facilitated, environmental the greater part of the growth in motorised journeys must developments as well, it will be possible to achieve environ- adapt to accommodate a tripling of public transport use. mentally sustainable and functional transport systems. If we allow this growth in population and transport In any event, we want the proposals outlined in K2012 demand to take place without wide-ranging control of land concerning land use to be considered as input to the future use and infrastructural facilitation, it will not be possible planning process. In doing so, we will be able to to avoid the evolution of a dysfunctional infrastructure with demonstrate the opportunities for the long-term devel- traffic queues, gridlock and the consequent negative impact opment of a public transport network designed to accom- on climate and the environment involving massive increases modate massive regional growth in a purposeful way. in pollution and energy use. This scenario forms the The outline of the regional trunk network in the 2060 background to Ruter’s support for a joint approach to land scenario also shows the locations of key transport hubs, use and development policy which to a greater degree than and demonstrates the fundamental assumption involving previously opens the door to an efficient public transport investment in selected connected towns and system, thus making it possible to address this massive environmental developments, carried out alongside growth in a functional and cost-effective way, with the least the general concentration and development in Oslo. We possible negative impact on the environment. Among other have based our transport network assessments on an things, this will entail population concentrations around assumption that most of the growth will evolve as a result transport hubs in Oslo, and towns and rail-connected towns of a general concentration combined with regulated growth in Akershus and the rest of the Oslo metropolitan area. in designated transport hubs in Oslo and connected towns In areas adjacent to stations which will be the subject of such in Akershus, while a quarter will come in the form of new focus, issues of agricultural land conservation should be set connected towns and environmental developments. Based against perhaps even more weighty environmental on considerations related to an efficient public transport considerations. network, combined with the need to boost the proportion of The joint regional planning project has yet to arrive at any journeys made by public transport, the greater part of the specific proposals, but there appears to be broad agreement growth should be targeted at Follo and the western region on the need for controlled development with a focus on rather than in Øvre Romerike. genuine coordination of land development and rational transport systems. When the time comes for the initial planning of sound future transport systems, the challenge

8 K 2012 K2012 Summary 1 Sammendrag

Green space Rail network

New / modernised rail network Automac light rail Automac Bus

Bus Metro Walking distance Urban development

New environmental urban development

Eidsvoll Roa

OSL Gardermoen Oslo Airport Hønefoss Jessheim

Årnes Ask NEW

Nittedal NEW

New Gjøvikbane Grønnstruktur Sørumsand Ringeriksbane Grorud Lillestrøm NEW Automatbane

Oslo S Buss Bjørkelangen Sandvika Gang- avstand

Asker Nesodden Flateby NEW Gjersrud/Stensrud NEW

Røyken NEW Ytre Enebakk Drammen Måna miljøby Ski Skotbu NEW Hurum NEW Drøbak Ås

Mysen

Moss

Ruter’s outline of a regional trunk network for 2060, with the approximate locations of new connected towns and environmental developments..

K 2012 37 K 2012 9 3. Ruter aims to safeguard values and prioritise a reliable transport network

Reliable services demand a focus on reinvestment and Upgrades for reliability and attractiveness maintenance Metro signal system upgrade 1 000 Ruter intends to prioritise value-preserving maintenance Lambertseterbanen, upgrade 650 and reinvestment ahead of service expansion and new Østensjøbanen, upgrade 470 Røabanen, upgrade 480 investment. This is essential if we are to guarantee more Sognsvannsbanen, upgrade 390 reliable transport services. If we allow lags to arise, Holmenkollbanen, upgrade 390 technical faults and possibly also temporary service Grorudbanen, upgrade 610 Furusetbanen, upgrade 470 shutdowns will lead to major problems undermining the Metro joint sections, upgrade 400 efficient functioning and attractiveness of public transport Metro network, various upgrades 530 services. Rail-based services are attractive among our Total metro network 5 390 customers and provide high levels of capacity. However, Ekebergbanen, upgrade 260 Gamlebyen, upgrade 50 train, Metro and tram services have experienced major Rådhusplassen, upgrade 20 reliability problems in recent years primarily due to lags in Stortingsgata, upgrade 90 reinvestment and inadequate levels of maintenance. Majorstutrikkene, upgrade 160 In practice, this basic fact must be weighed against Grünerløkka, upgrade 220 Rikshospitalet-Jernbanetorget, upgrade 170 the need to keep pace with changes in land development Tram network, electrical upgrade 240 and new building projects in a region undergoing massive Tram network, various upgrades 100 growth. For example, if we are to serve the new devel- Total tram network 1 310 opments along Oslofjorden (Fjordbyen) with a reliable Total upgrades 6 700 and coordinated public transport network, we must be there when building expansion takes place. The alter- A list of upgrade funding requirements necessary to native, involving late-stage patchwork projects, is rarely recover line infrastructure reinvestment lags. (NOK mill.) successful, and generally more expensive. From 2010 mechanisms have been put in place to The total sum required is NOK 6.7 billion. This amount ensure that funds earmarked for future upgrades of new includes an upgrade to current standards, and not simply a infrastructure, such as the Kolsåsbane, are incorporated restoration of standards as they were in the year the infra- into the annual operations budgets with amounts corre- structure was opened, such as that of the 1960s in the case sponding to normal levels of depreciation. Furthermore, of large parts of the Metro network. the action programme makes provision for an acceleration The increase on previous estimates is particularly large in ongoing maintenance activities, so that from 2012 we for the tram network, which is under additional stress due will be safeguarded against extraordinary levels of infra- to a combination of road sharing with other vehicles and structure deterioration, and thus be able to maintain reliable construction deficiencies (which have since been repaired on standards of operation. This will require an annual sum of the most recent SL95 trams). NOK 900 million. Funds for the recovery of lags will come Lags in reinvestment should be recovered within a in addition, amounting to NOK 670 million annually over a maximum of ten years. Based on the situation in 2011, and ten-year period. In total this amounts to a level some in order to prevent new lags arising, we require an annual NOK 300 million higher than for 2011. increase in funding levels corresponding to approx. However, a sum of this magnitude is not adequate to offer NOK 300 million. We also face an additional future challenge our customers a flawless system. Nor is it sufficient to fund in that upgrade funds for the “Oslopakke 3” (Oslo Package winter maintenance operations which permit accessibility 3) are gradually being reduced in order to finance the to all in accordance with the intentions behind the require- procurement of new Metro rolling stock. ments linked to universal access. During 2011, Ruter will In the context of the need for tram rolling stock make a proposal to those responsible for road maintenance upgrades, we may have to evaluate special and more rapid to carry out a study with the aim of analysing the impacts of approaches. Moreover, the action plan set out in O3 assigns such maintenance levels. priority to reinvestment, especially within the framework In December 2010, the company Kollektivtransport- of Ruter’s smaller investments, but only on condition that produksjon AS (KTP) produced a comprehensive report provision has been made within Ruter’s operational projects addressing the scope of costs of lag recovery linked to infra- and the overall investment framework earmarked for public structure upgrades on the Metro and tram networks. transport initiatives.

116 K 2010 10 K 2012 K2012 Summary 1 Sammendrag K 2012 4. Ruter aims to consolidate its trunk network with the construction of two new city centre Metro and railway tunnels, linked together with effective interchange hubs

New Gjøvikbane

Olavsgaard Vestli Kjeller Skjetten

Stovner

Lillestrøm Grorud st Rykkinn Østerås Hosle Sinsen Furuset New Oslo tunnel Majorstuen Ellingsrudåsen Olaf Løren Bislett Ryes pl A-hus Kolsås Skøyen Økern Alna Tøyen Lysaker Nationaltheatret Stortinget Bryn Oslo S Ringeriksbane

Sandvika Follobanen Fornebu

Goods track

Nesoddtangen

Mortensrud

Metro Existing New

Gjersrud/Stensrud Subject of assessment, including track options

Rail network Existing Follobanen New

39 The modernisation of the current ”T-bane” system to an In the K2010 report it was assumed that after 2030 upgraded Metro network with increased capacity facili- we would require a new tunnel running through Oslo tated by a new city centre tunnel in order achieve capacities that would allow the Metro Metro development should focus on safety, security, relia- network to accommodate its share of the projected growth bility, and customer satisfaction. In the first two four-yearly in journeys. The pace of growth we now observe, and the action programmes, the majority of funds will be earmarked needs triggered by our intention to extend services to for reinvestment and upgrades. Moreover, the Lørensvingen locations such as Fornebu, may necessitate more rapid project will be completed as an initiative which, in addition progress. Furthermore, Ruter recommends that an analysis to serving Lørenbyen, will boost capacity throughout the of a projected new tunnel along the Majorstuen – Bislett – entire network. It is recommended that Fornebu be served Stortinget – Grünerløkka – Tøyen – Bryn section be carried by a Metro service via Skøyen. Subsequent expansions of out. We envisage a service infrastructure combining both the network may include extensions to Ahus (Akershus the old and new tunnels such that the trains will pass either University Hospital) and Rykkinn, and a cross-connection through the Oslo S/Jernbanetorget or the Nationaltheatret between Økern and Furusetbanen. interchanges. The provisional construction costs for this On receipt of rolling stock procurements approved in infrastucture are NOK 10 billion. The accumulated benefit 2010, we will obtain a number of MX trains which will permit amounts to NOK 30 billion, and the net benefit per budget optimal exploitation of the capacity of the shared tunnel krone is clearly positive (approx. +2). The major benefit to since we will be able to deploy six-carriage trains for all customers will be that the majority of branch lines will be rush-hour services. able to offer increased capacity and frequency, with Today, the Metro network’s shared tunnel has an departures every 5-6 minutes. operational capacity of 28 trains per hour. Automation initia- A Metro service to Fornebu from Majorstuen via Skøyen tives will make it possible to send 32 trains per hour through will cost approx. NOK 4.5 billion, and a new station at the tunnel at present levels of punctuality. Additional costs Majorstuen approx. NOK 2 billion. Implementation by means in excess of an upgrade, which is essential under all of a joint public/private enterprise (OPS model) must be circumstances, amount to NOK 1 billion. studied in more detail.

K 2012 11 5. Ruter aims to make its tram services more modern and efficient by, among other things, the introduction of new, high-capacity, light rail routes

Existing New Tram Kjelsås Alternative route

Tåsen City bus Rikshospitalet Nydalen Regional bus Forskningsparken Tonsenhagen Storo Bjølsen Bjerke Smestad Ullevål sykehus Sagene Sinsen

Torshov Majorstuen

Jar Carl Økern Bislett Berners pl Skøyen Homansbyen Olaf Ryes pl Hasle

Th Heftyes pl St Olavs pl Bekkestua Hammersborg Solli Nationalth Tøyen Ensjø Helsfyr Stortinget Oslo S Filipstad Tjuv- holmen Bryn

Sørenga

Ryen

The future of the tram network lies in significant increases rights of way, and higher priority at road crossings with in capacity at much lower unit costs than at present the aim of achieving more rapid journey times. The tram Ruter recommend that a total upgrade of all rolling service should serve areas with a demand for high frequency stock, combined with increases in capacity by means of services, improve its exploitation of infrastructure and procurement of a total of 84 new and modern trams, be operational costs, and generally expand in order to offer carried out as soon as possible. In order to reap the full services over longer distances. In the long-term, in a much benefit of these upgrades, and avoid guarantee problems expanded metropolitanLjabru area, the tram network should be

that may be generated by the introduction of new trams developed to light railwayHauketo standard, and in this context the onto a run-down infrastructure, we propose a parallel introduction of tunnel sections should also be assessed. acceleration of the entire tram network infrastructure In order to consolidate the PT network and better serve renovation project. In total, this will involve investment and our current and future market, we recommend in the first reinvestment costs amounting to approx. NOK 3.5 billion. instance redirecting the tram service from Schweigaards It is likely that the combination of new tram stock, new gate to Bjørvika, a new route in Kvadraturen, an extension workshop equipment and a fresh business model will of the Fjordtrikken’s eastern branch and extensions to facilitate this renovation without any increase in annual Tonsenhagen and Hauketo. In the longer term we are evalu- costs. Even with increases in capacity and improve- ating a tram/light rail service along Ring 2. Furthermore, an ments in service frequencies (to 7.5- and 3.5-minute assessment can be made as to whether the two heavily used departure intervals, replacing the current 10 and 5 minute bus routes via Sagene to Nydalen and Tåsen/Kjelsås should frequencies), the cost increase will be less than 10 per cent. be converted to tram services. Ruter has proposed that the Ruter aims to invest in its tram network based on the Gjøvikbanen between Strømsveien and Kjelsås might be assumption that in future such services will assume a role incorporated into a future tram network. within the overall transport services provision which will A development as outlined here could provide a pure better exploit their inherent advantage, and thus lay the tram network serving the streets located within Ring 1. At foundation for a more healthy financial status. Tram services the same time parts of the current tram network in the inner must to a much greater degree be provided with their own city west area can be re-assessed. K 2012 40

12 K 2012 K2012 Summary 1 Sammendrag

6. Ruter aims to optimise its bus services by directing greater focus on new market opportunities

Service differentiation from five-minute departures to Regional train on-demand services Ruter’s bus services shall be made up of main routes S-train devoted to non-rail connected corridors/areas combined Environment with local routes providing supplementary coverage. At RuterMetro all Mobility for operational hubs, the local buses will connect with the rail region Functional network and main bus routes. Clearer differentiation will RuterTrikk enable us to achieve an even better match between service provision and the market. RuterBy Ruter’s aims, and those of public transport in general, are three-fold: RuterEkspress 1. To ensure that society is fully functional by providing public transport services which are more effective than RuterBåt car use in terms of traffic congestion avoidance. 2. To contribute towards a better environment by means of RuterRegion reducing pollution. 3. To provide mobility to all by providing travellers without RuterBestilling On-demand the use of a car access to a service enabling them to reach their desired destinations. Ruter aims to work towards achieving a basic service In the most densely-populated urban and suburban areas, frequency in urban and central suburban areas of between all of the above will normally be achieved in a concerted 10 and 15 minutes. In order to facilitate transfers, especially manner, even if rush-hour services are primarily focused for feeder buses, good coordination with national rail on promoting functionality. It is difficult to differentiate rail- operators is essential. Service frequencies of less than 10 based services in the same way as for buses. The minutes require well organised connections at selected opportunity to offer a service limited on grounds of mobility hubs. In the case of routes with service frequencies of less thus applies in particular to the bus network. than 1 hour, it is difficult to establish effective connections In less densely populated areas, the public transport between several routes. Seen in isolation, such services are customer base is diffuse, capacity is not normally a problem also less attractive and represent poor competition when on the roads, and the environmental benefit of taking the bus compared with car use. Service frequencies of 1 hour to the as an alternative to the car is either limited or non-existent. closest town, rail-connected town or major hub should thus Ruter aims to define a basic service level for the bus normally represent a minimum requirement for scheduled network, in part to act as a foundation for its own service bus services. Other areas should be served by on-demand, development and in part as an anticipated point of departure and possibly also by rush-hour, services. for municipalities, developers and the resident population. The minimum service is provided by universal school The existence of concentrated building development, services, supplemented by on-demand services for routes combined with a road network which permits the provision that cannot be covered by scheduled school services. Due to of a rational public transport system, will always increase cost reduction considerations, on-demand services should the potential for provision of an effective bus service. be better coordinated with special minibus and taxi services. As is well known, high service frequency is the most Transport services for the disabled (TT services) should important quality-related factor in a public transport form an interactive part of the public transport service context. In order to achieve an efficient network, in which network. the various transport options and routes connect effectively The criteria for being able to provide a basic hourly at hubs and ordinary transfer locations, service frequencies scheduled bus service should involve a combination of of ten minutes or better are required. On the other hand, a population density or other customer-generating factors, service frequency of better than 5 minutes has no marked environmental impact (normally at least 5 passengers on effect on efficiency. average) and subsidy requirement (normally below 80%).

K 2012 13 7. Ruter aims to develop cost-effective operation and an optimised Ruter network

Optimised network, reliable service organisation and cost- effective operation Ruter aims to become more efficient by developing and coordinating its services in such a way that its resources are invested where the benefit and potential demand and revenues are greatest. Opportunities for better coordination and interaction across the county boundary were exploited after Ruter was established, but there is still potential for more effective use of shared resources. As part of the optimisation of Ruter’s network, the provision of a functional service network and a better environment are assigned higher priority than high levels of PT mobility in less densely populated districts. Role sharing among the various means of transport and the level of feeder service provision are defined and adjusted with an increased focus on future efficiency rather than habit and tradition. The strength of the rail network in terms of shorter journey times is exploited better by means of investment A more orderly traffic situation and prioritisation of the in hub stations. The implementation of an effective joint smooth running of tram and bus services will promote coordination model must be safeguarded by Ruter assuming efficiency. responsibility for train and service bookings for disabled. Furthermore, Ruter should assume overall responsibility address deficiencies in the programming or maintenance of for determining the standard of shelters at stops and travel signal prioritisation. We should also be capable of preventing information, etc. service shutdowns due to inconsiderate parking and Production is made more effective by means of contracts deployment of the emergency services which affect tram which focus on incentives which make provision for targeted users in particular. or higher levels of quality within a given budget framework. Det Norske Veritas has carried out a project for Ruter An attempt shall be made to set out the terms of reference aimed at analysing the vulnerability of public transport – for bus service tenders such that the operators’ part of and thus of society as a whole – by examining the impact of the bid development will be accorded increased flexibility. possible incidents on the Metro, trams, buses and ferries. A In order to guarantee enhanced quality and satisfactory 24-hour shutdown of the Metro network costs society NOK cost levels for Metro and tram services, we propose a new 55 million, and a three-hour shutdown in the shared tunnel business model which may entail that these services will NOK 11 million. A half-hour shutdown of tram services on a also be the subject of competitive tenders. single route with three lines costs NOK 0.3 million, and the cumulative annual cost of tram service shutdowns resulting Delays result in annual losses of more than NOK 3 billion from illegal parking is between NOK 4 and 17 million. Trams and buses caught up in traffic jams represent a poor Ruter has reviewed the service efficiency targets set utilisation of society’s resources. Time delays to customers ten years ago and has supplemented these with punctu- alone represent an annual loss to society as a whole of more ality targets. The achievement of the consistent target of a than NOK 3 billion. Moreover, the prioritisation of journey speed of 20 km/h for tram services and major urban improvements in the smooth running of bus and train bus services has not been met by some considerable margin, services on a par with the better overseas examples, although some improvements in journey speeds have been and the Bergen Light Rail system, would release up to achieved. Massive increases in traffic have resulted in a NOK 200 million which could be used to finance the need for increased stop capacity in order to facilitate flow. increases in capacity which a boost to attractiveness and Punctuality targets state that at least 80 % of services shall increases in customer numbers will demand. be delayed by no more than 3 minutes – on departure, at Sluggish services, delays and cancellations, result connections with hubs, and on arrival. Metro services shall from a variety of causes which arise both in isolation and be tested against a one minute delay target although no in combination. It should be relatively straightforward to specific targets have been set in the first instance.

14 K 2012 K2012 Summary 1 Sammendrag

8. Ruter aims to modernise its sales channels

The travelcard represents an important stepping stone, and new ticket media are on the way From October 2011 Ruter’s ticketing systems is almost entirely electronic, coinciding with the introduction of a new fare and zone system. Moreover, the system is the foundation for a coordinated national ticketing technology, although its practical application will require entry into commercial billing agreements between county-based service providers such as Ruter, train operators, interested express bus operators and others. The full implementation of a seamless, travelcard- based electronic ticketing system is an important milestone. However, we also see that technological development is advancing rapidly, and that it may be possible to replace some options previously selected with more customer- friendly and operationally efficient systems. For example, there is an evident need for online equipment, allowing the customers’ travelcards to be updated immediately following a ticket purchase regardless of where the ticket is bought, such as at home via the internet. The use of mobile telephones both as ticket carriers and payment media will also represent a step forward towards systems combining customer expectations and cost-effec- The mobile telephone is an example of an electronic ticket me- tiveness. It is assumed that such models will meet security dium which will gradually be able to supplement or eventually requirements and considerations related to the protection replace the travelcard currently used by PT customers of personal data. A mobile ticketing system should be forward-looking, customer-friendly and standardised. Ruter Fares which combine subscription and single journeys is focusing on the establishment of a national standard and Once our initial experience with the new fare and zone is taking part in this work. Everything indicates that the pace system has been evaluated, it will be natural to consider of roll-out of smart phones and mobile payment systems whether the opportunities inherent in electronic ticketing will in the short term provide us with exciting opportu- systems can be exploited in a more customer-oriented nities, enabling customers to adopt mobile systems as their way. An example of this might be the flexible adjustment of preferred ticket media. In a longer term perspective Ruter fares for customers who exhibit infrequent or inconsistent envisages that travelcards linked to specific companies travel behaviour patterns. Such an assessment will also will be phased out as ticket media, and will be replaced by apply to customers who are unsure as to their travel plans shared systems owned and operated by organisations which for the weeks ahead. In such situations it may be an idea offer ticket transaction processing as their core activity. to introduce the combination of a subscription, set at a In the shorter term Ruter will gradually transfer its significantly lower entry price than the current 30-day ticket, sales transactions away from the buses and trams etc. followed by a discounted fare per journey taken. An alter- themselves, and onto the internet, automatic machines and native model would involve an automatically progressive mobile phone platforms. This will make service operations discount enabling the customer to pay for each single more efficient and provide increased levels of safety and journey, but at a gradually lower fare depending on the security. In cases where alternatives are reasonably easily development of his or her travel patterns as the subscription accessible, a supplementary charge is made for onboard period progresses. sales also for regional buses. The use of simple automatic Electronic systems are well suited to handling fare ticket machines onboard trams and city buses will also differentiation systems in public transport contexts. be considered. We will also look into the use of validators Measures taken to steer demand towards periods with free onboard Metro services, thus facilitating a universal ticket capacity should assume the existence of periodic variations validation system, making it easier for our customers. in charges imposed on private cars.

K 2012 15 9. Ruter aims to be accessible, and intends to give priority to its traffic information services

Holdeplassen her

E2 Destinasjonsnavn 31 Destinasjonsnavn 33 Destinasjonsnavn 301 Destinasjonsnavn 160 cm Holdeplassen her N40 N41 N44 N47

Rutehefter Timetable booklets

75 cm Bybuss City bus

Better information for customers Universal access Comprehensibility and simplicity are basic principles for the Universal access is a basic precept of the concept behind promotion of an accessible transport service. Good planning public transport, and is also grounded in legislation. Ruter and design of the network are just as important as the aims to provide a transport service which is both safe and stations, stops and interchanges. However, there will always secure, and which provides universal access as rapidly as be a need for effective multimedia travel information for our practically and financially possible. Transport services for customers. Ruter has developed an upgraded travel infor- the disabled (TT) should be incorporated as part of Ruter’s mation and design system (TID) and its implementation will service provision, not only on principle in terms of the nature be assigned high priority in the years ahead. The fact that of public transport, but also with a view to optimum service the real time information (RTI) component is valued at close coordination. to NOK 2 per journey illustrates the benefit to customers. Meeting the demands and aims of universal access Technological developments in the fields of journey requires awareness, funds and resources on an entirely planning and the updating of information about service different scale from what has been the case in the past. In changes and delays are advancing rapidly, and digital its own strategy document, Ruter has stated the need for distribution and mobile media carrying an individual’s investment amounting to NOK 1.8 billion, which is considered personal details are playing an increasingly greater role. to be the minimum requirement needed to achieve a However, there will always be a need to provide compre- standard corresponding to legislative requirements, targets hensible guidance and directions to customers linked to the and intentions. At current levels of subsidy (state and local services themselves. Ruter aims to provide a better service funding), it will take more than a century before this target onboard when it comes to providing real time information is reached. Moreover, we require entirely different levels of about connections. We also see opportunities for two-way maintenance from those currently the norm, especially in communication with our customers. As regards information the winter months. No financial assessments have yet been about service changes and delays, Ruter will resume its made regarding this issue. work to establish a shared centralised centre which will be Ruter recommends that initiatives to promote universal able both to provide information and reorganise capacity on access should constitute a separate item in the imminent the basis of overall assessments agreed between operators. revision of “Oslo Package 3”.

16 K 2012

K 2012 5 K2012 Summary 1 Sammendrag

10. Ruter recommends a higher degree of state involvment in public transport in the Oslo metropolitan area

Society’s ability to function is dependant on an efficient greater part of the growth in motorised journeys – about public transport system 5% per year. Subsidy increases should correspond more There is a broad level of agreement within the transport closely to traffic growth. Furthermore, in addition to sector and among developers and researchers that the providing increased capacity and attractiveness for our only means of achieving an effective transport system is future customers, we should also be working to recover our increased investment in public transport, combined with infrastructure upgrade lags which amount to NOK 6.7 billion, controlled land development implemented with public not including the rail network. transport services in mind. Any environmental benefit of A revision of the targets involved indicates that in such a policy must be seen as a bonus. 20 years time Ruter will have to facilitate twice as many Development in the Oslo area in recent years, and subse- journeys as it does today. It is unrealistic to expect that this quently also in Akershus, has demonstrated that this works. will happen without a corresponding increase in budgetary In just the last three years since Ruter was established, resources. Increased levels of public transport use imply Oslo and Akershus have seen an increase of 19 per cent in new economies of scale, but at the same time both our PT journeys. The 271 million trips made in 2010 correspond customers and the environment are making stricter to about 55% of all public transport use in Norway. Market demands on standards. The construction of tunnels, better shares have increased dramatically, and public transport reliability and improved seating capacity are examples of has now captured 31% of the motorised journeys in the factors which drive up costs. region as a whole, and as much as 45% in Oslo. In Oslo, car However, it would be much more expensive to base traffic remains at 2004 levels, despite a 15 per cent increase future projections on car use rather than on a consolidated in population. public transport system. KS report 23/2011 estimates that However, PT in Oslo and other key centres within the the costs linked to a car-based scenario will be twice as region is experiencing growing pains. An annual population high as those for an environmentally-based model. Ruter’s growth rate of around 1.5-2% cannot be accommodated socio-economic calculations show a current financial benefit under current budgetary circumstances, and when our to society of NOK 1.78 per krone in subsidy. stated aim is to ensure that public transport captures the

Stovner Lillestrøm

Frognerseteren Sognsvann 6 mins. Ellingsrudåsen A-hus 12 mins. 12 mins. Lillestrøm Nydalen Storo Sinsen 6 mins. Veitvet Furuset Løren 3 mins. Ullevål stadion 6 mins. Økern 6 mins. 2 mins. Carl Berners plass 6 mins. 2 mins. 2 mins. 2 mins. 6 mins. Smestad Majorstuen Bislett Olaf Ryes pl Tøyen Hellerud

Østerås Hosle St Olavs pl Hammers- Bryn borg

Homansbyen Grønland Rykkinn 6 mins. 6 mins. Nationaltheatret Stortinget Oslo S 6 mins. 6 mins. Kolsås 2 mins. 2 mins.

Skøyen Bergkrystallen Mortensrud Fornebu Bjørndal Sandvika Nesodden Gjersrud/Stensrud

Increased capacity in the Metro network resulting from the building of a new tunnel through Oslo city centre should be a national project. The figure shows frequencies using two tunnels connected at Stortinget (Parliament) station, the Løren connection, the For- nebu branch, the Økern-Furuset link and several other extensions

K 2012 17

K 2012 41 The levels of procurement by the state in the public There currently exists an artificial and unnecessarily transport sector in the Oslo metropolitan area should be large distinction between the rail network and other public raised gradually to their optimum socio-economic level, transport networks within the region. The rail network is an which is some NOK 750 million higher than current levels. important component of public transport service provision Furthermore, investments and reinvestments amounting to in the Oslo metropolitan area. Today, approximately one in NOK 180 billion are required to fund new and more efficient every ten public transport journeys in the region is taken by public transport infrastructure projects during the next train. Customers use a common ticketing system and travel 50 years. These include rail network projects which Ruter for the most part independently of whether responsibility regards as relevant to the scope of its own market. These lies locally or with the state. There is broad agreement investments correspond to a yearly average of NOK 3.6 that higher levels of investment should be made in the rail billion. This raises challenges not least involving predict- network and that effective coordination between the rail and ability and the introduction of subsidies tailored to ensure bus networks should be established at interchange stations. that projects are completed on time and at an optimum rate A new Metro tunnel through Oslo is one of several of construction. examples of public transport projects in the Oslo and Akershus area with a high positive net benefit per budgeted A need for new approaches to conceptualisation, delegation krone. It should be possible to implement projects such as of responsibility, organisation and financing this without negative external spin-offs, and at a pace which Ruter is contributing on behalf of Oslo Municipality and guarantees that customers receive the benefit as rapidly Akershus County Council to the NTP’s studies into long-term as possible, for example by means of dedicated project challenges related to capacity issues in the Oslo area. subsidies. This is clearly a positive approach. At the same time, Ruter is As an alternative option by which to achieve a more recommending that consideration be given to an entirely new effective delegation of responsibility, Ruter recommends approach which also takes analytical methods into account evaluating a model by which the state assumes overall as well as organisational and financial issues. At present responsibility for all rail infrastructure. At the same there is a clear distinction between the scope of time Ruter will assume responsibility at local level for responsibility exercised by the state and local agencies, the procurement of local rail services. This will enable combined with the fact that the approach adopted by the better coordination with the other public transport service state is governed by its ownership interests in the networks. The current system is somewhat less than infrastructure. We recommend a joint approach, adopting optimal. Ruter, under the auspices of its corporate bodies, market and operational considerations as a starting point. must at the same time be assigned a pre-defined role with It is here that both the needs and our opportunities to freedom to provide input regarding needs related to state- succeed really lie, and there are differences between public funded infrastructure projects. transport and private vehicle traffic, which in turn call for different approaches.

Possible future Metro stations at Grünerløkka and Bislett

18 K 2012 K2012 Summary 1 Sammendrag

K 2012 19 Investment plan

In parallel with Ruter’s activity with K2012, work has been continuing with the ongoing development and revision of the action programme incorporated in the O3 framework and National Transport Plan (NTP). Ruter’s work is carried out with assistance from, and in collaboration with, the relevant government and local organisations. Ruter also continues to be involved in components of the O3 and NTP studies. In the light of this, Ruter finds it inappropriate in the present document to present its specific action programme proposals, either for the short- or long term. The budgetary allocations between purely road- and public transport- related measures should be made as part of a balancing process based on a broader foundation than that presented in K2012.

On the other hand, Ruter intends by means of the K2012 document to argue that if we are to develop the capacity and quality needed to meet politically agreed transport targets, there is an equally clear need for increased investment in operational measures as there is for investment in public transport. Neither the O3 framework nor the state budget currently provides for funds which are in keeping with these targets. At the same time, the balance of focus of the measures is inadequate, since according to the O3 concept selection study, focus is insufficiently directed towards public transport needs.

While making this budget assessment we also intend to argue for isolated initiatives and packages of measures in the public transport sector which can contribute towards achieving the stated targets. These measures focus on the following three issues:

1. To guarantee reliability by means of renovation and modernisation 2. To guarantee the capacity to accommodate future growth in traffic 3. To guarantee a good public transport system serving new housing, business and services developments

Ruter is currently presenting a list of measures sorted under four categories based on 1) priority, 2) planning development stage, c) funding, and d) time perspective.

20 K 2012 K2012 Summary 6 Ruters plan1 Sammendrag 2010–2013

Investments needs, estimates (NOK millions)

Category 1 Category 2 Category 3 Category 4 Total Short-term Short-term Long-term Long-term high priority, desirable needs Under O3-framew. assessment Increased capacity Category 1. In addition to miscel- Rail, Follobanen (separate item in Norwegian state budget) 12 000 laneous items, Category 1 includes Oslo Bus Terminal 700 relatively well-developed projects Tram, Dronning Eufemias gate 60 which it should be possible to Partial automation of Metro (suppl. to signaling system renovation) 1 000 implement fairly rapidly, and Metro, Lørensvingen 1 000 preferably within the defined O3 Metro, Kolsås 1 000 framework (including rail projects). Tram, Tonsenhagen 450 Fjord Tram system (east) 250 250 Metro, Fornebu-Skøyen-Majorstuen 4 500 Majorstuen station 2 000 Category 2 includes projects at Tram, Ljabru-Hauketo 200 200 various stages of planning and Bus lanes, Akershus 150 350 concept development, and for which Busway, Alnabru-Bryn-Oslo centre 1 000 investment should be set aside in the Busway, Storo-Bryn 1 200 short or medium term. Tram, Bygdøy allé/Thomas Heftyes gate 400 New Metro tunnel Majorstuen-Bryn 10 000 Light rail Majorstuen-Sagene-Bryn 2 500 Category 3 includes projects which Homansbyen station 800 have been tabled for the long-term, Tram, Bryn-Jernbanetorget-Sagene-Nydalen 2 000 but for which general principles and Tram, Jernbanetorget-Sagene-Kjelsås 2 000 investment needs remain somewhat New railway tunnel through Oslo 25 000 unclear. More concept development Metro/ Light rail, Sandvika-Kolsås-Rykkinn 3 000 work is needed together with Accessability 2 000 2 000 new models related to funding Station rebuilding etc. for 3-carriage trains, Holmenkollbanen 400 and delegation of responsibility, Interchanges, stations, stops, park-and-ride 1 600 2 000 including greater state involvement Universel access 750 750 in issues related to PT infrastructure Miscellaneous and rounding up 50 940 1 000 6 200 in the Oslo metropolitan area. Subtotal 21 610 15 590 13 500 39 000 87 700

Developing areas: new services/operations Metro, Gjersrud/Stensrud 2 100 Category 4, together with Category Single to double track conversions, local train services 35 000 3, includes projects tabled for the Metro, Lørenskog/Ahus 2 500 long-term currently in the concept Metro, Økern-Alna-Furuset 3 000 phase and which require new Railway, New Gjøvikbane: Nittedal 8 500 planning processes. The projects Railway, Hurumbanen 20 000 noted here are examples used to Metro/ Light rail, Stovner-Lillestrøm 7 500 illustrate the scope of such projects Metro, Nesodden 5 000 rather than to suggest specific Subtotal 2 100 40 500 41 000 83 600 solutions. Studies to date indicate Total new infrastructure 21 610 17 690 54 000 80 000 173 300 that they will require new models Total for rail projects under provisional planning by Ruter 12 000 35 000 53 500 100 500 related to funding and delegation of responsibility, including greater Upgrades to promote reliability and attractiveness Metro state involvement in issues related Renovation of Metro signaling system 1 000 to PT infrastructure in the Oslo Metro, Lambertseterbanen, upgrade 650 metropolitan area. Metro, Østensjøbanen, upgrade 470 Metro, Røabanen, upgrade 480 Metro, Sognsvannsbanen, upgrade 390 Railway system: concepts related Metro, Holmenkollbanen, upgrade (excl. station rebuilding) 390 to rail projects and associated cost Metro, Grorudbanen, upgrade 610 estimates are Ruter’s responsibility, Metro, Furusetbanen, upgrade 470 even though Ruter has cooperated Metro, joint sections, upgrade 400 with the Jernbaneverket (Norwegian Metro, miscellaneous upgrades 530 National Rail Administration) in Total Metro 5 390 preparing K2012. Rail projects Trikk are included in order to provide a Tram, Ekebergbanen, upgrade 260 comprehensive overview. As such, Tram, Gamlebyen, upgrade 50 the rail investment total stated here Tram, Rådhusplassen, upgrade 20 is not intended to be complete in Tram, Stortingsgata, upgrade 90 terms of the long term rail infra- Tram, Majorstuen lines, upgrade 160 structure investment needs in the Tram, Grünerløkka, upgrade 220 Oslo metropolitan area. Tram, Rikshospitalet-Jernbanetorget, upgrade 170 Tram, electricity infrastucture upgrade 240 Tram, miscellaneous upgrades 100 Total, tram system 1 310 Total upgrades (excl. rail) 6 700

Total new and upgraded infrastructure 27 000 19 000 54 000 80 000 180 000 Annual average investment (50-year period) 3 600

Needs of investments on short term and long term (NOK mill.)

K 2010 119 K 2012 21 6 Ruters plan 2010–2013

Ruter Reports (Norwegian)

2012:2 Strategi for spesialtransport mar.12 2010:3 Fremkommelighet og tilgjengelighet. 2012:1 Ruter’s Business Plan 2012–2060 Årsrapport 2009 feb.10 (Oversettelse av K2012) feb.12 2010:2 Fjordtrikken – Sammendragsrapport feb.10 2011:18 Sentrumsplan for trikk og buss. 2010:1 Banebetjening av Bjørndal og Gjersrud/Stensrud Sluttrapport des.11 feb.10 2011:17 Prinsipper for trafikktilbudet nov.11 2009:22 Trafikktilbud sydområdet des.09 2011:16 Nytt signalsystem metro. 2009:21 Ny rutemodell og vognbehov metro okt.09 Mulig automatisering okt.11 2009:20 Trikk til Tonsenhagen, et forprosjekt nov.09 2011:15 Halvårsrapport sep.11 2009:19 Fjordtrikken Sluttrapport trasé- og 2011:14 Superbussmateriell aug.11 konsekvensutredning nov.09 2011:13 Bedre trikketilbud i Gamlebyen jun.11 2009:18 Fjordtrikken Fase 1 traséutredning nov.09 2011:12 OPS som mulighet for gjennomføring av 2009:17 Fornebubanen. Sluttrapport trasé- og Fornebubanen jun.11 konsekvensutredning nov.09 2011:11 Kollektivtrafikkbetjening av Fornebu. 2009:16 Fremtidig vogntype for Holmenkollbanen sep.09 Sammendragsrapport jun.11 2009:15 Halvårsrapport 2009 sep.09 2011:10 K2012. Ruters strategiske kollektivtrafikkplan 2009:14 Ruters miljøstrategi 2010–2013, 2012-2060 jun.11 høringsutkast sep.09 2011:9 Brukertest av nytt trafikantinformasjonsprogram, 2009:13 Linjenettstruktur for kollektivtrafikken i Oslo og Jernbanetorget apr.11 Akershus 2010–2030 sep.09 2011:8 Situasjonsanalyse Trafikantinformasjon apr.11 2009:12 Samfunnsregnskap for Ruter 2008 sep.09 2011:7 Sårbarhetsanalyse. Samfunnsøkonomisk 2009:11 Økt effektivitet for metro og trikk sep.09 konsekvens av hendelser apr.11 2009:10 K2010 – Ruters strategiske kollektivtrafikkplan 2011:6 Årsrapport 2010 mar.11 2010–2030 sep.09 2011:5 Kollektivtrafikkbetjening av Fornebu. 2009:9 Ruters tilgjengelighetsstrategi sep.09 Trasé- og konsekvensutredning mar.11 2009:8 Forprosjekt for trikk i Frederiks gate, 2011:4 Fremkommelighetsstrategi mar.11 vurdering av alternativer sep.09 2011:3 Fremkommelighet og tilgjengelighet. 2009:7 Incentivbaserte kontrakter og Årsrapport 2010 mar.11 konkurranseutsetting aug.09 2011:2 Universell utforming – 2009:6 Samspill mellom administrasjonsselskap og strategi og handlingsprogram mar.11 operatør jun.09 2011:1 Persontrafikk på Alnabanen feb.11 2009:5 Bussterminal i Oslo jun.09 2010:17 Stoppestedsstrategi des.10 2009:4 Fremkommelighet for kollektivtrafikken, 2010:16 Trikkestrategi nov.10 Årsrapport 2009 jun.09 2010:15 Miljø- og samfunnsregnskap for fortetting ved 2009:3 Vurdering av trasévalg for nedre del av stasjonsnære jorder nov.10 Briskebytrikken jun.09 2010:14 Merkevarestrategi mai.10 2009:2 Bybane Fornebu–Skøyen, statusrapport jun.09 2010:13 Trafikkplan Follo des.10 2009:1 Årsrapport 2008 2009 2010:12 Anbefalinger for TID-programmet, Carl Berners plass knutepunkt sep.10 Rapporter 2006–2008 2010:11 Halvårsrapport 2010 sep.10 Holmenkollbanen, T-bane til Holmenkollen skiarena des. 08 2010:10 H2011 – Ruters prisstrategi, soner og billettslag des.08 Ruters handlingsprogram 2011–2014 okt.10 Lørensvingen – Planprogram okt.08 2010:9 Innfartsparkeringsstrategi okt.10 BEST, benchmarking status report 2006–2008 okt.08 2010:8 Øybåtterminal i Pipervika mai.10 Ny T-banestasjon på Majorstuen okt.08 2010:7 Kollektivtrafikkløsning for Fornebu. Innfartsparkering Rosenholm sep.08 Sammendragsrapport mar.10 Bussterminalløsninger i Oslo sentrum mai.08 2010:6 Årsrapport 2009 mar.10 Holmenkollbanens fremtid feb.08 2010:5 Metronettets rutemodell og vognpark 2012–2020 mar.10 Kollektivtrafikk, praktisk veileder for by- og trafikkplanleggere nov.06 2010:4 Ny bussterminal ved Oslo S. Plassering og utforming feb.10 Kollektivtransport i nordiske byer, potensial og utfordringer sep.06

K 2010 117 6 Ruters plan 2010–2013 K2012 Summary 1 Sammendrag

Ruter Reports (Norwegian)

K 2012 23 K 2010 117 Ruter As Dronningens gate 40 Postboks24 1030 Sentrum K 2012 0104 Oslo Telefon: 40 00 67 00 www.ruter.no