Beyond patchwork planning: Why smart cities are co-operative cities

Pollution: one of the costs of not being smart. Image: Getty.

Londoners wishing to lead an active lifestyle in Western Europe’s biggest city are all too aware of the day-to-day obstacles that make regular exercise a non-starter.   

Chronic air pollution has made it more and more difficult to exercise in the great outdoors without taking in lungfuls of vehicle fumes. Public Health England revealed in August that more than four-in-ten middle-aged adults do less than 10 minutes of moderate exercise per month. With World Health Organisation (WHO) air pollution limits regularly breached in the Capital, it’s easy to see why many are reluctant to don their running kit for a post-work blast around the block.

London has traditionally had a troubled relationship with the environment, but there are signs that recent air pollution policies are starting to have a positive impact. City Hall is investing millions to tackle London’s poor air quality, but the environmental challenges we face can fox even the Capital’s best thinkers.

The capital’s evolution from a modest Anglo-Saxon settlement to today’s thriving metropolis has been far from smooth. Be it housing or transport, London has rarely taken a step back and fashioned a long-term coherent future for itself.

As London established itself as a global industrial hub in the early 19th century, the Thames quickly became polluted with thousands of gallons of industrial effluent. The problem came to a head during the ‘Great Stink’ of 1858 when the pungent aroma of the Thames became so bad that Parliament toyed with the idea of moving the business of government as far afield as Oxford or St Albans. The long summer recess that has so many MPs plotting to this day was enacted because the smell during August was too much to bear for Parliamentarians that could escape to their country seats.

When factories were springing up either side of the Thames in the 1800s, makeshift slums were haphazardly constructed in a bid to house the growing workforce. Predictably, these slums failed to provide a sustainable post-war housing solution and so planning departments scrabbled around to sign-off huge inner-city tower blocks. These quickly became undesirable places to live and so workers moved to commuter towns on the edge of the city. In need of a way of getting to work, they soon acquired cars which chuck out tonnes of pollutant particulates into the atmosphere.

As it was a muddle of patchwork planning and projects that got us to this point, it’s clear that coming together in a more collaborative and coordinated way to resolve the pollution problem is the way forward. Cities working together on innovative and proven solutions will help us all in the long run, accelerating ideas that work and learning from those ideas that don’t.

Headquartered at City Hall in London, Sharing Cities is a pan-European programme working with municipalities across the continent in a bid to help ordinary people feel the benefits of new smart technologies. We are looking to tomorrow in a holistic way to help European cities like London, Lisbon and Milan realise a greener, healthier, wealthier future for generations to come.


Currently being tested across Greenwich, Lisbon and Milan, electric bikes (eBikes) are a tantalising prospect for Londoners fed up of wasting hours in traffic jams and tired of feeling the effects of incessant exposure to traffic fumes. Fuelled by both pedal power and electricity, eBikes are a great way of encouraging Londoners who may have given up conventional cycling years ago to get back in the saddle.

We are also testing smart lampposts that can perform a host of functions, from providing data on traffic levels, to sending information to drivers telling them where spaces are available, to improving lighting which reduces street crime. By providing a safer environment for exercise, smart lampposts will help alleviate the fears of joggers reluctant to take to the streets.

Sharing Cities is also currently installing charging points in a bid to build the infrastructure required to support electric vehicle use in cities which will cut air pollution. It’s clear that better air quality will make outdoor exercise a more appealing proposition.

Smart technologies will help to reduce air pollution, congestion and crime across London. By taking a holistic approach to urban planning, we can make the dream of an active and healthy lifestyle a more realistic prospect for millions of Londoners.

Nathan Pierce is programme director of Sharing Cities. To learn more visit sharingcities.eu

 
 
 
 

Everything you ever wanted to know about the Seoul Metro System but were too afraid to ask

Gwanghwamoon subway station on line 5 in Seoul, 2010. Image: Getty.

Seoul’s metro system carries 7m passengers a day across 1,000 miles of track. The system is as much a regional commuter railway as an urban subway system. Without technically leaving the network, one can travel from Asan over 50 miles to the south of central Seoul, all the way up to the North Korean border 20 miles north of the city.

Fares are incredibly low for a developed country. A basic fare of 1,250 won (about £1) will allow you to travel 10km; it’s only an extra 100 won (about 7p) to travel every additional 5km on most lines.

The trains are reasonably quick: maximum speeds of 62mph and average operating speeds of around 20mph make them comparable to London Underground. But the trains are much more spacious, air conditioned and have wi-fi access. Every station also has protective fences, between platform and track, to prevent suicides and accidents.

The network

The  service has a complex system of ownership and operation. The Seoul Metro Company (owned by Seoul City council) operates lines 5-8 on its own, but lines 1-4 are operated jointly with Korail, the state-owned national rail company. Meanwhile, Line 9 is operated jointly between Trans-Dev (a French company which operates many buses in northern England) and RATP (The Parisian version of TfL).

Then there’s Neotrans, owned by the Korean conglomerate Doosan, which owns and operates the driverless Sinbundang line. The Incheon city government, which borders Seoul to the west, owns and operates Incheon Line 1 and Line 2.

The Airport Express was originally built and owned by a corporation jointly owned by 11 large Korean firms, but is now mostly owned by Korail. The Uijeongbu light railway is currently being taken over by the Uijeongbu city council (that one’s north of Seoul) after the operating company went bankrupt. And the Everline people mover is operated by a joint venture owned by Bombardier and a variety of Korean companies.

Seoul’s subway map. Click to expand. Image: Wikimedia Commons.

The rest of the lines are operated by the national rail operator Korail. The fare structure is either identical or very similar for all of these lines. All buses and trains in the region are accessible with a T-money card, similar to London’s Oyster card. Fares are collected centrally and then distributed back to operators based on levels of usage.

Funding

The Korean government spends around £27bn on transport every year: that works out at 10 per cent more per person than the British government spends.  The Seoul subway’s annual loss of around £200m is covered by this budget.

The main reason the loss is much lower than TfL’s £458m is that, despite Seoul’s lower fares, it also has much lower maintenance costs. The oldest line, Line 1 is only 44 years old.


Higher levels of automation and lower crime rates also mean there are fewer staff. Workers pay is also lower: a newly qualified driver will be paid around £27,000 a year compared to £49,000 in London.

New infrastructure is paid for by central government. However, investment in the capital does not cause the same regional rivalries as it does in the UK for a variety of reasons. Firstly, investment is not so heavily concentrated in the capital. Five other cities have subways; the second city of Busan has an extensive five-line network.

What’s more, while investment is still skewed towards Seoul, it’s a much bigger city than London, and South Korea is physically a much smaller country than the UK (about the size of Scotland and Wales combined). Some 40 per cent of the national population lives on the Seoul network – and everyone else who lives on the mainland can be in Seoul within 3 hours.

Finally, politically the biggest divide in South Korea is between the south-west and the south-east (the recently ousted President Park Geun-Hye won just 11 per cent of the vote in the south west, while winning 69 per cent in the south-east). Seoul is seen as neutral territory.  

Problems

A driverless train on the Shinbundang Line. Image: Wikicommons.

The system is far from perfect. Seoul’s network is highly radial. It’s incredibly cheap and easy to travel from outer lying areas to the centre, and around the centre itself. But travelling from one of Seoul’s satellite cities to another by public transport is often difficult. A journey from central Goyang (population: 1m) to central Incheon (population: 3m) is around 30 minutes by car. By public transport, it takes around 2 hours. There is no real equivalent of the London Overground.

There is also a lack of fast commuter services. The four-track Seoul Line 1 offers express services to Incheon and Cheonan, and some commuter towns south of the city are covered by intercity services. But most large cities of hundreds of thousands of people within commuting distance (places comparable to Reading or Milton Keynes) are reliant on the subway network, and do not have a fast rail link that takes commuters directly to the city centre.

This is changing however with the construction of a system modelled on the Paris RER and London’s Crossrail. The GTX will operate at maximum speed of 110Mph. The first line (of three planned) is scheduled to open in 2023, and will extend from the new town of Ilsan on the North Korean border to the new town of Dongtan about 25km south of the city centre.

The system will stop much less regularly than Crossrail or the RER resulting in drastic cuts in journey times. For example, the time from llsan to Gangnam (of Gangnam Style fame) will be cut from around 1hr30 to just 17 minutes. When the three-line network is complete most of the major cities in the region will have a direct fast link to Seoul Station, the focal point of the GTX as well as the national rail network. A very good public transport network is going to get even better.