FINEST LINK WP2 Appendix 2. Passenger volume estimation

FINEST LINK WP2 Appendix 2. Passenger volume estimation

Content Objectives and approach 3 9 Present situation 10 14 Preliminary train operating concept and land use projections 15 17 Trip type analysis 18 29 Preliminary passenger volume estimation 30 36 Temporal variation of passenger volumes 37 40

Approach Description of the framework and travel demand estimation concept

The aim of this memo To assess the probable magnitude of passenger traffic and travel behaviour in the Fixed Link (tunnel) scenario by relevant references and case studies. The first estimate of the total demand and temporal trip distributions are made for WP3 so that e.g. the train operating concepts can be outlined. To describe transparently the baseline data and methodologies behind the first passenger volume estimation. statistics, surveys, revealed behaviour interpretations and assumptions to be considered again in the sensitivity analysis

Travel demand analysis concept Understanding the present situation Assumptions First estimations The final volume estimations Collecting baseline data (land use etc) Interpretations Train operation concept Uncertainties in assessment The preliminary concept of Fixed Link Facts Revising land use projections Sensitivity analysis Relevant references and case studies Trip type analysis Accessibility model application Regional, social and demographical development

Set-up An important part of the WP2 is to estimate passenger volumes in all alternatives. How passenger traffic demand and travel behaviour could develop if the tunnel 2017 (reference) will not be built? will be built? Scenario 0+ The future situation without the fixed link The alternative in the comparative analys Scenario FL The future situation with the fixed link 2050 (comparison)

Scenarios and alternatives 0 (zero) scenario Refers to present situation, which will be described for reference purposes to understand changes in travel patterns. 0+ (zero+) alternative Describes the future situation without the fixed link. Answers the question how passenger traffic could be developed if the tunnel will not be built. The 0+ -alternative will be presented as the alternative in the comparative analysis. FL (Fixed link) alternative Refers to situation where the tunnel is built. Answers the question how passenger traffic and travel behaviour could be developed if the tunnel will be built and operated as planned.

Fundamental elements in the analysis scenario 0+ scenario FL Land use projections Transport system plans FinEst Connection perspective year 2050 Operational environment, external factors The project

An example of accessibility analysis Travel times from Tallinn, Lasnamae Travel times from Lasnamae The accessibility model deals with: Land use data in 250m x 250m grid (2050) Inhabitants Jobs Travel times Public transport in Helsinki Metropolitan Car/Public transport in Tallinn area Land use accessibility will be analysed using time zones.

Base line data Description of the present situation

Passengers In the last 10 years: The growth has been rapid. The number of passengers has grown +50 %. The average annual growth has been +4 %. Source: Finnish traffic agency, 2017

Current volumes and patterns Millions of passengers Reasons to travel by nationality 5.5 8.7 1.4 1.8 other 0.3 source: Finnish traffic agency 2017 ja TAK 2015/2016

Private car transport The need to transport private cars on ferries is linked to 15 % of all trips. There is no detailed information about characteristics of private car transport needs. Source: Finnish traffic agency, 2017

Summary of present situation Approximately 8.7 million trips are made annually in the Helsinki-Tallinn corridor. The share of ferry trips is significant (97 %). The growth of passenger car transport has been rapid between Helsinki and Tallinna. Over 1.3 million private cars are being transported at the moment. Finns make the most of the trips (63 %). The share of Estonians is 16 %. Other nationalities represent 21 % of all traffic. Travel patterns varies greatly compared to Finns with Estonians. Leisure and shopping purposes are clearly emphasized behind the trip reasons. The volume of tourism from Finland to Tallinn is already approaching the saturation level (source: Economic flows between Helsinki-Uusimaa and Tallinn-Harju regions, 2013)

Base line data Preliminary train operating concept and land use projections

Travel times and stops (at this point) Balti jaam Ülemiste Helsinki Central Pasila Helsinki-Vantaa Airport 5 min 30 min 5 min 10 min Additionally: Getting to the station Waiting time (depends on the service frequency) Getting out from the station (i.e. Helsinki -70 m) Travelling to the final destination 5 min 10 min x min x min

Land use projections (at this point) Population Helsinki Region Helsinki-Uusimaa Region Helsinki Metropolitan Area +39 % +41 % +39 % +29 % Tallinn Harju Region +40 % (=rapid growth scenario) (Tallinn based on preliminary assumption +1 % a year Seppo Laakso / Tarmo Kalvet)

Trip type analysis References, interpretations and assumptions

Fixed link demand analysis: relevant trip types Travel frequency Trip types Baseline data References, sources Crucial attributes for modal choice Daily Commuting trips Inhabitants, employees, jobs Commuting statistics (Helsinki Metropolitan Area, Øresund Bridge) Travel time, service frequency, accessibility of jobs Trips to schools and universities Inhabitants, universities Helsinki region commuting area travel behaviour surveys Fare, frequency, accessibility of schools Weekly Business trips Employees, head quarters Øresund Bridge database, surveys in Finland (Turku, Salo) Travel time, frequency, accessibility of business districts Occasionally Leisure, shopping, visiting Inhabitants, shopping areas Øresund Bridge statistics Fare, accessibility of commercial areas, services & scenery on a trip Transit, long distance trips Inhabitants Rail Baltica studies, rail passenger statistics (Fin- St. Petersburg etc.) Travel time, fare

Commuting to Helsinki Metropolitan Area Travel time elasticities: 40 mins = 25 30 % of employees 60 mins = 5 10 % 5.6 % 5.9 % 40 mins 60 mins Relevant references: Lahti, Hämeenlinna 6 % In the opposite direction 1.8 % Both private car and train involved!

Commuting via Øresund Bridge 35 million trips 20,000 commuters 1/3 of all traffic (30M) is commuting (10M) Commuting traffic flow has been mainly one-way, as nine out ten commuters travelled from the Swedish side. Figures in 2015 below: : Copenhagen Copenhagen City surrounding area Work place in Denmark North Bornholm East Zealand Zealand Work place in Sweden Skåne SW Skåne SE Skåne NE Skåne NW Rest of Sweden West- and South Zealand TOTAL Employed labor force 2014 Commuting rate Copenhagen City 509 5 15 53 0 582 274 225 0.2 % Copenhagen surrounding 137 0 4 30 0 171 586 229 0.0 % Source: Öresundsdatabasen TOTAL Employed labor force 2014 Commuting rate Malmö 5 621 2 245 341 2 193 94 8 496 125 218 6.8 % Rest of Skåne SW 1 914 816 117 1 75 19 2 942 158 547 1.9 % Skåne SW 7 535 3 061 458 3 268 113 11 438 283 765 4.0 % 47 % 40 %

The fares behind commuting Lahti Helsinki (104 km) Single ticket 16 (0,15 /km) 30 day-ticket 259 339 /30 days (0,06 0,08 /km) Malmö Copenhagen (40 km) Single 11,7 (0,28 /km) 30 day-ticket 210 (0,13 /km) On the average from above as a reference: Helsinki Tallinn (80 km) Single ticket 18 (0,23 /km) Frequent traveler 15 (0,19 /km) 30 day-ticket 480 (0,15 /km) Other references: Pre-feasibility study: 34 (the base price) Rail Baltica Final Report 32,30 Tallinn-Riga (0,095 /km)

Commuting estimate: starting points 1) Magnitude (Lahti, Hämeenlinna and Øresund) 6 % of employees within 60 mins 2) Modal share (Øresund Bridge) If only train option were available? 6 % x 67 % = 4 % 50 % no commuting via bridge 40 % 47 % x 50 % modal shift 67 % The first estimate is based on the assumption of 4.0 % (corresponds to Malmö, Lahti, Hämeenlinna) share of commuting from Tallinn to Helsinki and 1.5 % (estimation) the other way around

Commuting Tallinna Helsinki Tallinna 2050 Population 600 000 (+39 %) Employees 300 000 (+26 %) Jobs 404 000 (+26 %) 10 000 (66 %) 300 000 employees x 3.3 % 5 000 (34 %) 403 000 jobs x 1.5 % commuting frequency 4 days a week 15 000 commuters 24 000 daily trips 5.8 mill. annual trips

Commuting to place of study Today 2 % of all trips between Helsinki/Tallinna Regular study trips are short Ticket price matters too Malmö <-> Copenhagen 450 students 1-2 % Study trip lengths: average 9 km median 7 km Source: Helsinki region commuting area travel behaviour surveys 2008 and 2012 300 students 400 daily trips 0.15 mill. annual trips

Business trips Estonia Finland 15 20 % of all trips are currently related to business interactions. 29 % 9 % 35 % 50 % 15 % 20 % of commuting 1.2 mill. annual trips

Long distance trips / transit Nearly 20 percent of all trips from Estonia to Finland is on the way to other country. 16 % Air passengers (2016) Helsinki-Vantaa 16 million Tallinna lennujaam 2,2 million 28 % 150 000 trips (2015) 55 % 75 % 14 % 308 000 25 % Source: Visit Finland tourist survey 2015

Long distance trips by train Tallinn 1,4 mil. Pärnu 1,1 mil. Riga 1,2 mil. St. Petersburg 0,43 million trips Panevezys 2,1 mil. Kaunas 0,7 mil. Source: Rail Baltica Final Report

Long distance trips / summary Transit trips to the airports Assumption: 1.0 mill. trips (50 % from Estonia to Helsinki-Vantaa and 50 % from Finland to Tallinn lennujaam) would mean +200 % increase compared to present situation. Long distance train trips Finland St. Petersburg 0.5 mill. trips Finland to the south of Tallinn Assumption: 0.3 mill. trips / year from (800 daily trips) 1.1 mill. transit trips 0.3 mill. long distance

Final passenger volume estimation Total number of annual passengers by trip types

Passenger volumes in the scenario 0+ The average growth of passenger volumes has been +4 % in the past 10 years. Port of Helsinki has estimated the annual growth of 2 % in the future. Annual passenger growth in scenario 0+ in this estimation: 2016 2030 2030 2050 +2 % / year +1% / year 2016 situation: 8.7 mill. passengers 2050 situtation: 14.1 mill. passengers

Transport mode shifts It is very likely that trip types that are most sensitive to shortened travel time could shift from ferries to train: Work-related trips Business trips Transit trips 2.5 million trips Additionally study, leisure and visit trips could shift to train depending on the train fares Assummed demand elasticity of fare change -0.3 Total shift from ferries to train 3.5 million trips 1.0 million trips

The Fixed link passenger demand 1 % 3 % 3 % 6 % 11.6 M of which 3.5 M trips shift from ferries 9 % 12 % 14 % 50% 12 M new annual trips 32 000 daily trips on the average

Ferry trips in the fixed link scenario 10.6 M Ease of access to commercial areas, services and scenery on a trip matter for these trip types instead of travel time.

Comparison to the pre-feasibility study Comparative Impact Analysis, 11/2017 Pre-feasibility study 2/2015 14 M 22 M 30 M The calculations include the assumption that 15,000 people are commuting in 2050. The calculations include the assumption that 40,000 people are commuting in 2080.

The main uncertainties in the passenger volume estimation The amount of commuting and business interactions depends strongly on the depth of the integration of Helsinki-Tallinn twin-city development and crossregional economic interaction in the future. Transport connections should not be developed as a stand alone measure from the rest of society. The improvement of physical proximity is just a way to implement common will and the twin-city development strategy. The Øresund region as the main reference indicates that At institutional level the restrictions of administrative structures, legislation ( bureaucratic barriers ) amd business and administration cultures must be lowered on the basis of a common strategy. The harmonization and standardization of taxation is also relevant. The flow of commuters is highly asymmetrical in the Øresund region.

Temporal variation of passenger volumes in the Fixed Link scenario

Distribution over the year / week Passenger volumes by month 11.6 mill. annual passengers 1 200 000 1 000 000 800 000 600 000 400 000 200 000 40 000 35 000 30 000 25 000 20 000 15 000 10 000 5 000 0 0 907 000 932 000 989 000 993 000 1 005 000 960 000 804 000 35 000 35 000 34 000 Passenger volumes during a week 36 000 36 000 988 000 1 020 0001 026 000 996 000 948 000 January February March April May June July August September October November December 35 000 daily passengers (Mon-Fri) 32 000 daily passengers (Mon-Sun) 23 000 22 000 Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun

Volumes over the day (Mon-Fri) in the tunnel

2 500 2 000 1 500 1 000 500 0 2 500 2 000 1 500 1 000 500 0 Volumes over the day (Mon-Fri) by trip type Passenger traffic over the day (Tallinn - Helsinki) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Passenger traffic over the day (Helsinki -Tallinn) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 other trips (visit etc) leisure trips from ferries long distance trips via Rail Baltica transit trips business trips commuting to place of study other trips (visit etc) leisure trips from ferries long distance trips via Rail Baltica transit trips business trips commuting to place of study