DOCSLIB.ORG

Full: Comparative Analysis of Bus Public Transport Concession Models

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Full: Comparative Analysis of Bus Public Transport Concession Models Comparative Analysis of Bus Public Transport Concession Models Full Report ii iii Content 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2. Case Studies................................................................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 London ............................................................................................................................................................................. 4 2.1.1 Public Transport Overview ........................................................................................................................... 4 2.1.2 History of Bus Services and Organization ............................................................................................... 6 2.1.3 Institutional Organization ............................................................................................................................. 7 2.1.4 Regulatory Framework ................................................................................................................................... 8 2.1.5 Bus Operation Contracts ............................................................................................................................... 9 2.1.6 Roles and Responsibilities of the Authority and Operators .......................................................... 13 2.1.7 Tendering Process ......................................................................................................................................... 15 2.1.8 Revenue and Costs ........................................................................................................................................ 17 2.1.9 Results of Contract Implementation ...................................................................................................... 18 2.1.10 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................... 21 2.2 Bogota ........................................................................................................................................................................... 22 2.2.1 Public Transport Overview ........................................................................................................................ 22 2.2.2 History of Bus Services and Organization ............................................................................................ 23 2.2.3 Institutional Organization .......................................................................................................................... 24 2.2.4 Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................................... 27 2.2.5 Bus Operation Contracts ............................................................................................................................ 28 2.2.6 Revenue and costs ........................................................................................................................................ 35 2.2.7 Results of Contract implementation ...................................................................................................... 41 2.2.8 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................................... 42 2.3 Mexico City .................................................................................................................................................................. 43 i 2.3.1 Public Transport Overview ........................................................................................................................ 43 2.3.2 History of Bus Services and Organization ............................................................................................ 44 2.3.3 Institutional Organization .......................................................................................................................... 45 2.3.4 Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................................... 46 2.3.5 Bus Operation Contracts ............................................................................................................................ 47 2.3.6 Corridor Distribution ................................................................................................................................... 51 2.3.7 Revenue and Costs ........................................................................................................................................ 52 2.3.8 Results of Contract Implementation ...................................................................................................... 53 2.3.9 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................................... 54 2.4 Stockholm .................................................................................................................................................................... 55 Public Transport Overview ........................................................................................................................ 55 History of Bus Services and Organization ............................................................................................ 55 Institutional Organization .......................................................................................................................... 56 Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................................... 57 Bus Operation Contracts ............................................................................................................................ 59 Tendering Process ......................................................................................................................................... 63 Revenue and Costs ........................................................................................................................................ 64 Results of Contract Implementation .................................................................................................... 66 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................... 68 2.5 Uberlandia ................................................................................................................................................................... 69 Public Transport Overview ........................................................................................................................ 69 History of Bus Services and Organization ........................................................................................... 70 Institutional Organization .......................................................................................................................... 71 Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................................... 72 Bus Operation Contracts ........................................................................................................................... 72 Tendering Process ........................................................................................................................................ 78 ii Revenue and Costs ....................................................................................................................................... 79 Results of Contract Implementation .................................................................................................... 79 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................................... 81 2.6 Pasto .............................................................................................................................................................................. 82 2.6.1 Public Transport Overview ........................................................................................................................ 82 2.6.2 Institutional Organization .......................................................................................................................... 85 2.6.3 Regulatory Framework ............................................................................................................................... 90 2.6.4 Bus System Transformation ...................................................................................................................... 93 2.6.5 Risk Allocation ............................................................................................................................................. 100 2.6.6 Lessons Learned and Conclusions ....................................................................................................... 101 2.7 León ............................................................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Integrating Urban Public Transport Systems and Cycling Summary And
    CPB Corporate Partnership Board Integrating Urban Public Transport Systems and Cycling 166 Roundtable Summary and Conclusions Integrating Urban Public Transport Systems and Cycling Summary and Conclusions of the ITF Roundtable on Integrated and Sustainable Urban Transport 24-25 April 2017, Tokyo Daniel Veryard and Stephen Perkins with contributions from Aimee Aguilar-Jaber and Tatiana Samsonova International Transport Forum, Paris The International Transport Forum The International Transport Forum is an intergovernmental organisation with 59 member countries. It acts as a think tank for transport policy and organises the Annual Summit of transport ministers. ITF is the only global body that covers all transport modes. The ITF is politically autonomous and administratively integrated with the OECD. The ITF works for transport policies that improve peoples’ lives. Our mission is to foster a deeper understanding of the role of transport in economic growth, environmental sustainability and social inclusion and to raise the public profile of transport policy. The ITF organises global dialogue for better transport. We act as a platform for discussion and pre- negotiation of policy issues across all transport modes. We analyse trends, share knowledge and promote exchange among transport decision-makers and civil society. The ITF’s Annual Summit is the world’s largest gathering of transport ministers and the leading global platform for dialogue on transport policy. The Members of the Forum are: Albania, Armenia, Argentina, Australia, Austria,
    [Show full text]
  • London Guide Welcome to London
    Visitor information Welcome to London Your guide to getting around central London on public transport and making the most of your visit. tfl.gov.uk/visitinglondon Tube and central London bus maps inside #LondonIsOpen Welcome to London Paying for your travel Public transport is the best way to get There are different ways to pay for your around London and discover all that the travel. For most people, pay as you go - city has to offer. This guide will help you paying for the trips you make - with a plan how to get around the Capital on contactless payment card, an Oyster card or public transport. a Visitor Oyster card, is the best option as it If you have just arrived at an airport and are offers value, flexibility and convenience. looking for ways to get to central London, go to page 11 in this guide. Getting around London London’s transport system is iconic. With its world famous Underground (Tube) and iconic red buses, travelling around the Capital is an experience in itself. But London is much more than just the Tube or the bus; our vast network of transport services includes: Contactless payment cards If your credit, debit, charge card or wearable device has the contactless symbol above you can use it for pay as you go travel on London’s public transport. Android Pay and Apple Pay are also accepted. Benefits of contactless • It’s quick and easy – there’s no need to queue to buy a ticket • It offers great value – pay as you go with contactless is better value than buying a single ticket and you can benefit from both Night Tube daily and weekly capping (see page 5) • 14 million people have used contactless Night Tube services run on the to travel in London – including customers Jubilee, Victoria and most of from over 90 countries the Central and Northern lines all night on Fridays and Saturdays.
    [Show full text]
  • Travel Information
    TRAVEL INFORMATION for students travelling to Kent from outside the UK Welcome to Kent! This leaflet and our Getting Started Public transport You can get a Tube map free of charge at website has all the information you You can use public transport to travel to the the information points at airports and train need to ensure a smooth journey to University from Heathrow, Stansted and Gatwick stations, or by visiting tfl.gov.uk/maps your new home at Kent. airports. We suggest that you do not use the licensed For the latest COVID-19 information black taxis that wait outside each airport terminal. concerning London public transport, visit They are priced using the taxi meter and are usually tfl.gov.uk/campaign/coronavirus?intcmp=63016 very expensive. Keep informed and stay safe For the Canterbury campus while travelling For details on how to book a taxi in advance of Heathrow – London St Pancras – Canterbury West Please be aware that UK Government arrival, please see www.kent.ac.uk/getting-started • Take the Piccadilly line (dark blue on the guidelines surrounding COVID-19 are /international-students Tube map) from Heathrow to King’s Cross subject to change. Routes and timetables St Pancras, (approximately 45 minutes). King’s are also subject to change by operators. Travel by train to the campuses Cross St Pancras Tube station leads directly into from Heathrow airport St Pancras International and the route is clearly Remember to continually check the status of You can travel from Heathrow to both the signposted throughout the Tube station. your journey and ensure you’re familiar with Canterbury and Medway campuses by train.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Transport Safety
    - PART II - Outline of the Plan CHAPTER 1 Land Transport Safety Section 1 Road Transport Safety 1 Improvement of Road Traffic Environment To address the changes in the social situation such as the problem of a low birthrate and an aging population, there is a need to reform the traffic community to prevent accidents of children and ensure that the senior citizens can go out safely without fear. In view of this, people-first roadway improvements are being undertaken by ensuring walking spaces offering safety and security by building sidewalks on roads such as the school routes, residential roads and urban arterial roads etc. In addition to the above mentioned measures, the road traffic environment improvement project is systematically carried out to maintain a safe road traffic network by separating it into arterial high-standard highways and regional roads to control the inflow of the traffic into the residential roads. Also, on the roads where traffic safety has to be secured, traffic safety facilities such as sidewalks are being provided. Thus, by effective traffic control promotion and detailed accident prevention measures, a safe traffic environment with a speed limit on the vehicles and separation of different traffic types such as cars, bikes and pedestrians is to be created. 1 Improvement of people-first walking spaces offering safety and security (promoting building of sidewalks in the school routes) 2 Improvement of road networks and promoting the use of roads with high specifications 3 Implementation of intensive traffic safety measures in sections with a high rate of accidents 4 Effective traffic control promotion 5 Improving the road traffic environment in unison with the local residents 6 Promotion of accident prevention measures on National Expressways etc.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nearest Railway Station Is Wool on the Main Line Between London Waterloo and Weymouth
    Travel Information for Bovington Camp updated Jun 2013 Rail The nearest railway station is Wool on the main line between London Waterloo and Weymouth. At Wool Station (south side) you will find a bus departure screen, taxi rank, bike racks and a local street map (the map is on the outside wall of the station building). There is an off-road cycle/footpath from Wool Station (north side) to Bovington Camp - the distance is about 2 miles. The Waterloo-Weymouth rail service is operated by South West Trains. Trains in each direction call at Wool at hourly intervals throughout the day and at similar intervals in the evening, seven days a week. During Mon-Fri peak hours, there are additional stops giving a half-hourly frequency. Up-to-the-minute information about train arrivals/departures at Wool Station can be viewed here. All London-bound trains from Wool call at Poole, Bournemouth, Southampton Central and Southampton Airport Parkway. Southampton Central is the main interchange point for a number of other rail services, namely: Portsmouth-Southampton-Salisbury-Bristol-Cardiff services operated by First Great Western. Bournemouth-Southampton-Reading-Birmingham-the North operated by CrossCountry. Southampton-Chichester-Brighton & -Gatwick-London (Victoria) services operated by Southern. Local services to Romsey, Eastleigh, Fareham and Portsmouth. All Weymouth-bound trains call at Dorchester South. From here, there is a well-signposted 10- minute walk to Dorchester West for train services to Yeovil, Westbury, Bath and Bristol operated by First Great Western. Alternatively, you can change between the two services at Upwey Station. You can plan your rail journey using the National Rail journey planner.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison Between Bus Rapid Transit and Light-Rail Transit Systems: a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approach
    Urban Transport XXIII 143 COMPARISON BETWEEN BUS RAPID TRANSIT AND LIGHT-RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEMS: A MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION ANALYSIS APPROACH MARÍA EUGENIA LÓPEZ LAMBAS1, NADIA GIUFFRIDA2, MATTEO IGNACCOLO2 & GIUSEPPE INTURRI2 1TRANSyT, Transport Research Centre, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain 2Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture (DICAR), University of Catania, Italy ABSTRACT The construction choice between two different transport systems in urban areas, as in the case of Light-Rail Transit (LRT) and Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) solutions, is often performed on the basis of cost-benefit analysis and geometrical constraints due to the available space for the infrastructure. Classical economic analysis techniques are often unable to take into account some of the non-monetary parameters which have a huge impact on the final result of the choice, since they often include social acceptance and sustainability aspects. The application of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) techniques can aid decision makers in the selection process, with the possibility to compare non-homogeneous criteria, both qualitative and quantitative, and allowing the generation of an objective ranking of the different alternatives. The coupling of MCDA and Geographic Information System (GIS) environments also permits an easier and faster analysis of spatial parameters, and a clearer representation of indicator comparisons. Based on these assumptions, a LRT and BRT system will be analysed according to their own transportation, economic, social and environmental impacts as a hypothetical exercise; moreover, through the use of MCDA techniques a global score for both systems will be determined, in order to allow for a fully comprehensive comparison. Keywords: BHLS, urban transport, transit systems, TOPSIS.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxis As Urban Transport
    TØI report 1308/2014 Jørgen Aarhaug Taxis as urban transport TØI Report 1308/2014 Taxis as urban transport Jørgen Aarhaug This report is covered by the terms and conditions specified by the Norwegian Copyright Act. Contents of the report may be used for referencing or as a source of information. Quotations or references must be attributed to the Institute of Transport Economics (TØI) as the source with specific mention made to the author and report number. For other use, advance permission must be provided by TØI. ISSN 0808-1190 ISBN 978-82-480-1511-6 Electronic version Oslo, mars 2014 Title: Taxis as urban transport Tittel: Drosjer som del av bytransporttilbudet Author(s): Jørgen Aarhaug Forfattere: Jørgen Aarhaug Date: 04.2014 Dato: 04.2014 TØI report: 1308/2014 TØI rapport: 1308/2014 Pages 29 Sider 29 ISBN Electronic: 978-82-480-1511-6 ISBN Elektronisk: 978-82-480-1511-6 ISSN 0808-1190 ISSN 0808-1190 Financed by: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Finansieringskilde: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH Institute of Transport Economics Transportøkonomisk institutt Project: 3888 - Taxi module Prosjekt: 3888 - Taxi module Quality manager: Frode Longva Kvalitetsansvarlig: Frode Longva Key words: Regulation Emneord: Drosje Taxi Regulering Summary: Sammendrag: Taxis are an instantly recognizable form of transport, existing in Drosjer finnes i alle byer og de er umiddelbart gjenkjennelige. almost every city in the world. Still the roles that are filled by Likevel er det stor variasjon i hva som ligger i begrepet drosje, og taxis varies much from city to city. Regulation of the taxi hvilken rolle drosjene har i det lokale transportsystemet.
    [Show full text]
  • S K Ä Rg Å Rdstrafikanten
    S k ä r g å r d s t r a f i k a n t e n Nr 1/2012 Organ för Skärgårdens Trafikantförening Årgång 48 Våren är på gång... ...och som vanligt finns den nya vårturlistan med i detta utskick. Kommentarer till denna turlista finner du i Lars Berglöfs analys på sidan 3 . Verksamhetsåret som vi lägger bakom oss har präglats av den pågpende, något förvirrade, diskussionen om skärgårdstrafikens framtid. Föreningen har genom ett flertal skrivelser och yttranden i frågan försökt skaffa sig en bild av vad som ska ske. När detta skrivs är frågan på intet sätt redovisad och vårt arbete måste fort- sätta i syfte att få bibehålla i stort sett den trafikomfattning vi haft under senare år. Kritiken vad avser handläggningen är omfattande från flera organisationer och intressenter. Glädjande är att pendelbåtstrafiken med ”Sjövägen” kan fortsätta även under innevarande år. Beträffande föreningens svar på landstingets RFI (Request or information) får vi hänvisa till föreningens hemsida där hela svaret finns utlagt. Den otydlighet i frågan om drift och ansvar för skärgårdstrafiken som råder gör att vi måste driva föreningens synpunkter mot politiken. Man borde inte kunna bortse från 500 000 resenärer från Stockholm, 70 000 från Lidingö och 50 000 från Nacka/Hasseludden. Ska Vaxholm försvinna som ”navet” i sjötrafiken? Man känner sig vara tillbaka till slutet av 1950-talet. Man trodde inte att en sådan situation skulle uppstå igen. Med 94 % nöjda resenärer borde inställningen vara att justera de förbättringar som behövs. Kanske viktigast av allt: man talar om en levande skärgård samtidigt som man uppenbarligen har för avsikt att kraftigt försämra trafiken.
    [Show full text]
  • Domestic Ferry Safety - a Global Issue
    Princess Ashika – Tonga – 5 August 2009 74 Lives Lost Princess of the Stars – Philippines - 21 June 2008 800 + Lives Lost Spice Islander I – Zanzibar – 10 Sept 2011 1,600 Dead / Missing “The deaths were completely senseless… a result of systemic and individual failures.” Domestic Ferry Safety - a Global Issue John Dalziel, M.Sc., P.Eng., MRINA Roberta Weisbrod, Ph.D., Sustainable Ports/Interferry Pacific Forum on Domestic Ferry Safety Suva, Fiji October / November 2012 (Updated for SNAME Halifax, Oct 2013) Background Research Based on presentation to IMRF ‘Mass Rescue’ Conference – Gothenburg, June 2012 Interferry Tracked Incidents Action – IMO / Interferry MOU Bangladesh, Indonesia, … JWD - Personal research Press reports, blogs, official incident reports (e.g., NZ TAIC ‘Princess Ashika’) 800 lives lost each year - years 2000 - 2011 Ship deemed to be Unsafe (Source - Rabaul Queen Commission of Inquiry Report) our A ship shall be deemed to be unsafe where the Authority is of the opinion that, by reason of– (a) the defective condition of the hull, machinery or equipment; or (b) undermanning; or (c) improper loading; or (d) any other matter, the ship is unfit to go to sea without danger to life having regard to the voyage which is proposed.’ The Ocean Ranger Feb 15, 1982 – Newfoundland – 84 lives lost “Time & time again we are shocked by a new disaster…” “We say we will never forget” “Then we forget” “And it happens again” ‘The Ocean Ranger’ - Prof. Susan Dodd, University of Kings College, 2012 The Ocean Ranger Feb 15, 1982 – Newfoundland – 84 lives lost “the many socio-political forces which contributed to the loss, and which conspired to deal with the public outcry afterwards.” “Governments will not regulate unless ‘the public’ demands that they do so.” ‘The Ocean Ranger’ - Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Crime on Public Transport: ‘Static’ and ‘Non-Static’ (Moving) Crime Events
    Western Criminology Review 5(3), 25-42 (2004) Crime on Public Transport: ‘Static’ and ‘Non-Static’ (Moving) Crime Events Andrew D. Newton University of Huddersfield _____________________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT This paper presents a theoretical discussion conceptualising some of the problems evident in analysing patterns of crime and disorder on public transport, and the environments within which such crimes occur. The public transport system is a multifaceted arena, with a complex interaction of settings (buses, trains and trams), facilities (stops, stations and interchanges) and users (staff and passengers). The design of these facilities, and the internal (inside a vehicle) and external (that a vehicle traverses) environments may all influence the level of crime experienced on the system. Thus, examining the manifestation of crime on public transport systems becomes a highly complex process. Current methods of crime analysis focus on ‘static’ crime events with a precise location (x,y co-ordinate). However on public transport crime may occur on a moving vehicle (non-static), and it is difficult to define a single location for this. For the purposes of analysis, it is contended that non-static crimes have a location, between two points and two times, represented as a single snapshot of time. Thus, in addition to analysing static crime events (points and areas), attention should also be focussed on how to analyse non-static (linear) crime events. Two possible techniques for such analysis are presented, alongside a discussion of the difficulties in collecting accurate and consistent data on crime on public transport. It is anticipated that an increase in the availability of such data will enable future empirical testing of the ideas presented.
    [Show full text]
  • A Bid for Better Transit Improving Service with Contracted Operations Transitcenter Is a Foundation That Works to Improve Urban Mobility
    A Bid for Better Transit Improving service with contracted operations TransitCenter is a foundation that works to improve urban mobility. We believe that fresh thinking can change the transportation landscape and improve the overall livability of cities. We commission and conduct research, convene events, and produce publications that inform and improve public transit and urban transportation. For more information, please visit www.transitcenter.org. The Eno Center for Transportation is an independent, nonpartisan think tank that promotes policy innovation and leads professional development in the transportation industry. As part of its mission, Eno seeks continuous improvement in transportation and its public and private leadership in order to improve the system’s mobility, safety, and sustainability. For more information please visit: www.enotrans.org. TransitCenter Board of Trustees Rosemary Scanlon, Chair Eric S. Lee Darryl Young Emily Youssouf Jennifer Dill Clare Newman Christof Spieler A Bid for Better Transit Improving service with contracted operations TransitCenter + Eno Center for Transportation September 2017 Acknowledgments A Bid for Better Transit was written by Stephanie Lotshaw, Paul Lewis, David Bragdon, and Zak Accuardi. The authors thank Emily Han, Joshua Schank (now at LA Metro), and Rob Puentes of the Eno Center for their contributions to this paper’s research and writing. This report would not be possible without the dozens of case study interviewees who contributed their time and knowledge to the study and reviewed the report’s case studies (see report appendices). The authors are also indebted to Don Cohen, Didier van de Velde, Darnell Grisby, Neil Smith, Kent Woodman, Dottie Watkins, Ed Wytkind, and Jeff Pavlak for their detailed and insightful comments during peer review.
    [Show full text]
  • TOURISM and TRANSPORT ACTION PLAN Vision
    TOURISM AND TRANSPORT ACTION PLAN Vision Contribute to a 5% growth, year on year, in the England tourism market by 2020, through better planning, design and integration of tourism and transport products and services. Objectives 1. To improve the ability of domestic and inbound visitors to reach their destinations, using the mode of travel that is convenient and sustainable for them, with reliable levels of service (by road or public transport), clear pre-journey and in-journey information, and at an acceptable cost. 2. To ensure that visitors once at their destinations face good and convenient choices for getting about locally, meeting their aspirations as well as those of the local community for sustainable solutions. 3. To help deliver the above, to influence transport planning at a strategic national as well as local level to give greater consideration to the needs of the leisure and business traveller and to overcome transport issues that act as a barrier to tourism growth. 4. In all these, to seek to work in partnership with public authorities and commercial transport providers, to ensure that the needs of visitors are well understood and acted upon, and that their value to local economies is fully taken on board in policy decisions about transport infrastructure and service provision. Why take action? Transport affects most other industry sectors and tourism is no exception. Transport provides great opportunities for growth but it can also be an inhibitor and in a high population density country such as England, our systems and infrastructure are working at almost full capacity including air, rail and road routes.
    [Show full text]