IN
DEGREE PROJECT THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 15 CREDITS
,
STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2020
COVID-19 and the
Transportation System Response
Lessons for the Post-Pandemic World CHRISTOPHER CARREIRA CHAU
KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT
i
COVID-19 and the Transportation System Response
Lessons for the Post-Pandemic World
Completed as a part of the requirements for the conferral of a Master of Science in Urbanism Studies degree at KTH Royal Institute of Technology in Stockholm, Sweden.
Project Supervisor
David Cooper, M.Pl., MCIP, RPP Principal, Leading Mobility Examiner
Tigran Haas, PhD
Copyright © 2020 C. Carreira Chau Cover photo: Chenyu Guan / Unsplash
AG218X Degree Project in Urban Studies
School of Architecture and the Built Environment www.kth.se/abe
Christopher Carreira Chau
ii
Den covid-19 coronapandemin har oväntat förändrat hur vi reser i våra städer. Trots pandemin står kollektivtrafiken kvar som en grundläggande samhällsfunktion. Därför utmanas regeringar, verksamheter, företag och övriga samhällsaktörer att agera
tillsammans för att kunna möta förändringar i resmönster och samtidigt uppmuntra till social distansering och begränsa risken för smittspridning.
Allmänhetens resebeteende har även förändrats under denna period. Allt fler väljer färdmedel där det är lätt att hålla avstånd till andra snarare än kollektivtrafiken. Det kan handla om till exempel att välja cykeln, taxi eller samåkning (t.ex. Uber/Lyft), andra innovativa färdmedel såsom elsparkcycklar, eller bilen när de är tillgängliga.
Vad kan städer lära sig av de olika svarsåtgärderna som vidtas under denna kris?
Hur bidrar de pågående förändringarna till att påverka framtidens trafikplanering, hållbar markanvändning och en eventuell övergång till en mer hållbart och aktivt transportsystem? De olika övergripande strategierna beskrivs med hjälp av fallstudier om olika nivåer av svarsåtgärder som har vidtagits i utvalda städer i Nordamerika, Europa och Asien. Dessutom skapar detta en verktygslåda med åtgärder för andra städer som vill anpassa sitt transportsystem.
Bland svarsåtgärderna som många städer har infört är munskyddskrav och
temperaturkontroller i kollektivtrafiken, ökat främjande och ökad tillgång till hyrcyklar och andra nya mobilitetsprogram samt omfördelning av gatuutrymmet till förmån för cyklister och gående för att främja social distansering. Fastän många av dessa svarsåtgärder infördes som tillfälliga nödåtgärder har de ändå möjlighet att bli en del av ett långsiktigt arbete mot ett transportsystem som främjar hållbara och aktiva transporter och en stad med mer plats för människor.
Nyckelord: COVID-19, coronavirus, kollektivtrafik, stadstrafik, transportsystem, cykel, gående, aktiv mobilitet, hållbar omställning
Lektioner för världen efter pandemin
Covid-19 och transportsystemets svarsåtgärder
Sammanfattning
Avslutad som en del av kraverna för tilldelningen av en Teknologie masterexamen i Urbana studier på
Kungliga Tekniska högskolan i Stockholm, Sverige.
Projekthandledare
David Cooper, M.Pl., MCIP, RPP Rektor, Leading Mobility
Examinator Tigran Haas, PhD
Title and Abstract in Swedish
iii
Abstract
The COVID-19 coronavirus disease has unexpectedly changed the way we travel in our cities. With urban transportation remaining an essential service, governments, agencies and organizations are being challenged to develop and implement changes that accommodate for the changing levels of travel demand, the shifts in mode of travel, and the promotion of physical/social distancing to limit the spread of the virus. Travel behaviours of the public have also changed during this time, favouring more physically distant options such as cycling, ridesharing and other new mobility solutions, and the automobile where available, rather than public transportation options.
What can cities learn from the different response measures during this crisis, and how does the current shift in urban transportation needs help inform future urban transportation planning, promoting more space and potentially shifting to more sustainable and active modes of transportation? Using case studies to outline the various levels of response measures to the transportation system being implemented in select cities in North America, Europe, and Asia, this highlights the varied overall approaches and generates a toolbox of interventions for the urban transportation sector.
Various cities have implemented measures such as mandatory face coverings and temperature checks on public transport, promoting and providing easier access to bike share and other new mobility programs, adjusting and reallocating space on public roadways to cyclists and pedestrians in an effort to promote physical distancing, among many others. While intended as initial emergency responses, measures from such a toolbox have opportunities to become further developed to long-term programs that can be aimed at shifting attitudes towards urban transportation, encouraging alternate or more active ways of movement, and reallocating space within the public realm for people.
Keywords: COVID-19, coronavirus, transportation, transit, cycling, active, walking, pedestrian
Abstract
v
Acknowledgements
I’d first like to thank my supervisor, David Cooper, who has been incredibly supportive and offered guidance to the direction and format of this research, even as we’re always multiple time zones apart. Your insight and expertise in the field of public transportation has been immensely helpful, especially in understanding the situation of transit in the west coast of North America. Additionally, I’d like to thank Ryan Locke, for his support in dealing with the administrative aspects, especially as our cohort was trying to understand how this project would be adapted to fit the recommendations and guidelines of the university and public health agency regarding COVID-19.
I’d also like to thank the rest of my friends and colleagues in the 2019-2020 Urbanism Studies program, for the support, conversations, and memories we’ve had throughout the year; whether it be during the late nights in the studio, the wonderful yet outrageous study trips we’ve been on, or just the time spent with each other’s company outside of classes, which was often. The unraveling of COVID-19, everyone rushing back home, and meeting for a class online every two weeks was certainly not the way we had planned to end our year and the final year of the program. I hope that we’ll be able to have a fancy, delayed “end-of-program” reunion soon, either at graduation, or wherever we happen to cross paths in the near future.
Lastly, a giant thank you to my parents. Your support, encouragement, and love has brought me to explore my interests in the urban landscape and my passion in urban transportation since I was a young child. I am immensely grateful for the opportunity to have studied urban planning, which has ultimately found its way for me to be in a whole other continent studying urbanism and public life in my graduate studies.
I hope that I am able to take these learned experiences through my educational career and apply them well to my future work as a planner, and be able to play a part in making our cities better connected, more liveable and more resilient.
Chris Chau
Stockholm, Sweden
November 2020
Acknowledgements
vii
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...1
Context...2
Problem Formulation...3
Objectives...3
METHODOLOGY...7
Literature Review...8
Case Study...8
PAST PANDEMIC RESPONSES...11
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS)...12
Influenza A (H1N1)...14
TRANSPORTATION AMID A CRISIS...17
A Global Decline in Transportation...18
The Transport Economics of a Pandemic...19
The Need for Space...21
Environmental Impacts...22
CASE STUDIES...25
How to Read the Case Studies...27
Toronto, Canada...28
Vancouver, Canada...34
New York City, United States...40
San Francisco, United States...46
Milan, Italy...52
Berlin, Germany...58
Hong Kong SAR, China...64
Taipei, Taiwan...68
LESSONS FOR THE POST-PANDEMIC WORLD...75
Principles for Future Planning...76
Best Practices and Strategies...80
CONCLUSION...85
REFERENCES...87
APPENDIX A: CASE SUMMARY TABLE...111
Table of Contents
viii
1
Introduction
The 2019-2020 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has placed enormous constraints and changes to the daily lives of almost everyone across the globe, especially with how we move around and interact with each other. The effects of this little-known virus have challenged governments, agencies and organizations across the world to adapt the urban environment to accommodate for declining levels of demand in travel, and increasing pressure to limit the spread of the virus.
Introduction
Left photo: Nikola Johnny Mirkovic / Unsplash
2
The 2019-2020 novel coronavirus
(COVID-19) pandemic has placed enormous constraints and changes to the daily lives of almost everyone across the globe, especially with how we move around and interact with each other. The effects of this little-known virus have challenged governments, agencies and organizations across the world to adapt the urban
environment to accommodate for declining levels of demand in travel, and increasing pressure to limit the spread of the virus.
Public health guidance, rules, and regulations are ever changing as we learn new information about how the virus behaves. The overall impact of these urban interventions can provide lessons in maintaining a healthy and sustainable transportation network in the post-pandemic world. As the situation progresses, a complete shutdown of the economy becomes less and less viable;
how are cities introducing ways to support and encourage a successful relaunch and reopening of the economy?
Context
In late December 2019, a string of unidentified pneumonia-like cases emerged from the city of Wuhan, China, which led to the identification of a novel coronavirus disease (2019-nCoV, which was later renamed as COVID-19), and its initial outbreak only limited within China (World Health Organization [WHO], 2020d).
According to the World Health
Organization (WHO), coronaviruses are a family of viruses causing illness in humans and/or animals, primarily exhibiting
symptoms of respiratory infection (WHO, 2020b).
The first recorded case of COVID-19 outside of China was on 13 January 2020, in Thailand; by the end of the month there have been 7,818 confirmed cases globally, with 82 cases recorded outside of China (WHO, 2020d). A WHO mission to China reported on 22 January 2020 that suggests human-to-human transmission exists with COVID-19 (WHO, 2020a).
On 11 March 2020, the WHO declared that the novel coronavirus disease, now known as COVID-19, has reached a level of pandemic, as the rates of infection globally have dramatically increased, with approximately 118,000 cases in 114 countries, and approximately 4,000 deaths worldwide (WHO, 2020c). As of 31 May 2020, there have been 6,164,784 confirmed cases of COVID-19 worldwide, and 371,987 deaths, and these statistics continue to grow (Johns Hopkins
University, 2020).
COVID-19 is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is an animal coronavirus that has spread to animal-to-human, and later to transmission between humans (U. S.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2020a). The virus is primarily spread through respiratory droplets expelled from the nose and mouth of an infected person, by direct exposure or coming into contact with surfaces that contain viral droplets (WHO, 2020b).
Introduction
Introduction
3 Infected persons exhibit symptoms similar
to influenza, such as fever, coughing and fatigue, among other less common symptoms, and are often mild, requiring little to no medical treatment (WHO, 2020b). Some reports indicate that the virus can be transmitted from people who exhibit mild or no symptoms, and during the initial incubation period of fourteen (14) days (Government of Canada, 2020b).
Problem Formulation
Transportation remains a crucial element in the face of a pandemic, especially with COVID-19, as it facilitates a continued movement of people such as essential workers, and goods in supply chain movement, such as medical supplies and food (Caballero & Dror, 2020). The severity of the virus and how it is spread presents challenges to the safe operation of the transportation system.
Measures to combat the spread of the virus have been introduced by various governments, agencies and organizations, including significant interventions and provisions affecting levels of service, new facilities by way of adjusting available right-of-way space to promote distancing, among others. To facilitate this research, the study seeks to answer, or provide an understanding to, the following research questions:
1. How has the transportation sector previously responded to public health outbreaks, whether at an epidemic or pandemic level?
2. What measures and interventions are being taken at the initial outbreak to manage the spread and effects of COVID-19, and how effective were they?
3. What can we learn from these changes and shifts in the transportation system, and how can we improve upon them for the post-pandemic society?
Objectives
With examining these different
interventions among the public realm, this study will provide an understanding about how cities are responding to a communicable disease outbreak, utilizing emergency response measures. These measures often are introducing space among people, or reducing services as a result of declining demand. Travel behaviours of the public have also changed during this time, favouring more physically distant options such as walking, cycling, ridesharing and other new mobility solutions, and the automobile where available. Such analysis would provide the transportation sector with a toolbox of measures, while for many cities, the initial intention as emergency response measures, to further investigate and develop into measures and programs aimed at reallocating public space
for people and more environmentally conscious modes of transport.
Introduction
4
As this is still an ongoing, active situation at the time of writing, it is understood that the analysis presented in this study may not represent all of the measures being taken by cities in response to COVID-19, nor does it provide an understanding of the situation, as it had evolved, at the time of final publication.
Statistics directly related to the public health aspect of COVID-19, like case numbers and death tolls, are accurate to the date that they have been associated with in the text. It is important to note, though, that these figures may be subject to change. Most of the research being taken on the immediate responses of the transportation system would be in effect on or before 31 May 2020, with some cities having ‘post-pandemic’ recovery measures being examined.
Note that circumstances, governmental and economic responses, and outlook towards the situation may have, or are very likely to, change between the time of writing and the time of publishing; this research examines only the initial outbreak and response of the COVID-19 pandemic, as it first emerged in early 2020.
The undertaking of this research seeks to provide an understanding of how different cities were coping at the first response of this little-known virus and provide an insight in how this pandemic would shape future urban planning and urbanism themes, policies, and outlook.
Introduction
5
This page intentionally left blank.
6
7
Methodology
The undertaking of this research will mainly consist of a literature review, with standardized case studies outlining the different measures taken by the local, region and/or national government(s) to the transportation system, in an effort to contain and control the spread of the virus, while maintaining a functional and adaptive network and system for everyone to use.
Methodology
Left photo: Etienne Godiard / Unsplash
8
The undertaking of this research will mainly consist of a literature review, with standardized case studies outlining the different measures taken by the local, region and/or national government(s) to the transportation system, in an effort to contain and control the spread of the virus, while maintaining a functional and adaptive network and system for everyone to use.
Taking an investigative lens, the literature review and case studies will examine and allow for comparison among the different levels and extent of initial response measures taken, and provide insight to recommendations and potential shifts to urban policy and planning among the transportation field, as the world emerges from the initial shock of the virus and begins to re-establish normalcy.
Literature Review
The literature review will examine journal articles (including those in preprint, due to the nature and novelty in our understanding of COVID-19), published books, governmental and not- for-profit organization reports, and news publications. These will focus on the responses with similar communicable disease outbreaks occurring within the last 20 years and investigate the nature of transportation and the transportation system within a global crisis.
A majority of the literary research examines the context, benefits, and constraints that a communicable disease outbreak, specifically to the vast extent and impact that COVID-19
placed worldwide, has on the operation and response of various transportation systems in urban centres of all sizes.
The uncertainty and novelty of
COVID-19, at the time of writing, lends its way to utilizing news articles and similar publications in research and understanding of the theories and workings of the virus and its impact towards transportation, and life in general.
Case Study
Case studies, in this report, will highlight and illustrate the various measures and interventions being put in place by the jurisdictions of various North American, European and Asian cities. These focus cities namely are Toronto (Canada), Metro Vancouver (Canada), New York City (United States), San Francisco (United States), Milan (Italy), Berlin (Germany), Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (China), and Taipei (Taiwan).
The North American context of Toronto, Vancouver, New York City, and San
Francisco examines the response of major metropolitan areas on each ‘coast’ of the country, all of them being international hubs and significant economic centres. In Europe, the city of Milan was chosen as it is considered the initial epicentre of the European outbreak of COVID-19, and Berlin was chosen to highlight some forward and proactive approaches in managing the virus outbreak in the continent as well.
The Asian context of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) and Taipei, while being in close proximity to the initial epicentre of Wuhan, China,
Methodology
Methodology
9 helps illustrate and compare how lessons
learned from previous epidemics in East Asia, specifically Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome in 2003, have influenced the response and overall effect of COVID-19 in these cities.
The case studies will undertake a
standardized analysis format, providing the ability to compare and contrast the various measures being undertaken among the larger scheme of protective and responsive measures against COVID-19. The analysis will first provide a simplified timeline of COVID-19 in that locale, the number of cases and deaths as of 31 May 2020, and public health advisories at the national, regional, and local levels. This will provide a basis comparison at how each city/region saw its COVID-19 outbreak develop and the initial toll among its population as part of the initial wave of infections.
Next, general measures being taken at a national, regional or local level will be outlined, such as whether a state of emergency has been called, whether there have been the placement of foreign travel restrictions, shelters- in-place, mass gathering restrictions, and the closure of public spaces. These general, initial response measures would provide information and understanding in how each city/region responded to its COVID-19 outbreak, which were often made in resolving a larger, public health- oriented, objective. They can highlight the overall responsiveness of the bureaucratic administration, and their willingness to put the needs, health, and well-being of their inhabitants at their utmost priority.
Then, the case study would outline and examine the various measures and interventions taken place on the public transport sector (i.e. buses, metros and trams, along with taxis, ridesharing and ride hailing), measures taken place on the active transportation network, which includes cycling infrastructure (including bike share systems and e-scooter new mobility solutions), as well as pedestrian infrastructure (like sidewalks and
streetscape adjustments).
Observing these individual measures in place in the public transport sector, this would highlight the level and range of initiative and innovation being taken by governments and private organizations to ensure that the transportation sector, being an essential service, remains functionally operating despite the challenges of declining demand and risks for virus transmissions between people. These measures that have been implemented may also indicate the
existence of a large potential in rethinking our urban transportation network, and how the innovation derived from adapting to a global public health crisis can change the perspective of urban dwellers and decision-makers to realize that potential in the long-term, as the world recovers from a pandemic.
Methodology
10
11
Past Pandemic Responses
Historic responses to communicable disease outbreaks have the ability to inform and guide the steps taken in future similar outbreaks as well, in efforts to combat and contain the spread of disease(s). The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome outbreak of 2003 in East Asia and Influenza A pandemic in 2009 illustrate changing habits and procedures among ordinary people, as well as with transport operators and agencies, to better protect each other in the face of a virus. These disease outbreaks were a crucial moment in the prevalence of face mask use en masse in many East Asian societies, in addition to a better understanding of respiratory viral diseases and how they may present a risk to public transportation systems.
Past Pandemic Responses
Left photo: Big Dodzy / Unsplash
12
Historic responses to communicable disease outbreaks have the ability to inform and guide the steps taken in future similar outbreaks as well, in efforts to combat and contain the spread of disease(s). The Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome outbreak of 2003 in East Asia and Influenza A pandemic in 2009 illustrate changing habits and procedures among ordinary people, as well as with transport operators and agencies, to better protect each other in the face of a virus.
These disease outbreaks were a crucial moment in the prevalence of face mask use en masse in many East Asian societies, in addition to a better understanding of respiratory viral diseases and how they may present a risk to public transportation systems.
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome
(SARS), 2003
In late 2002, a novel coronavirus emerged from Guangdong, China, which was
attributed as an atypical pneumonia at the time, and was later identified as Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, or SARS (WHO, 2003). Similar to COVID-19, SARS is primarily spread through droplets and presents respiratory symptoms like fever, coughing and difficulties in breathing (WHO, n.d.). At the time, Guangdong authorities were reporting that the virus was being spread primarily among healthcare workers and immediate personal contacts of patients from November 2002 through January 2003.
(WHO, 2003).
The spread of the virus gained significant traction in February 2003, when an infected patient from Guangzhou entered Hong Kong SAR, China, and spread the virus to other persons staying at the same floor of a hotel and the hospital he subsequently was admitted into; this led to the further spread of the virus to two additional hospitals, and export cases to Canada, Singapore, and Vietnam (Cherry, 2004). The virus, at its end, spread to 29 different countries, infecting 8,096 people and causing the death of 774 people (CDC, 2016).
Public transport systems faced challenges as the epidemic unfolded, with the risk of an unknown and new severe respiratory illness that was spread by close contact with others. In Taipei, Taiwan, the metro system faced an estimated loss of 1,200 riders upon each reporting of a new SARS infection case, indicating a relationship between the rise in cases, the perception of the virus and an inherent fear of infection (Wang, 2014).
This may be indicative of an
overabundance of caution among the population, where Asian urban centres host a large number of commuters congregating in tight spaces and transit vehicles, and taking measures among themselves to not become infected.
According to Wang (2014), this was one of the pivotal moments in establishing a ‘mask culture’ among Taiwanese
commuters, where facial masks are worn when out and about on public transport if they exhibit symptoms of illness, and became a staple to carry around.
Past Pandemic Responses
Past Pandemic Responses
Figure 1: The 2003-2004 SARS outbreak in East Asia brought prevalence to a culture of face masks among its residents, particularly in dense urban centres like Hong Kong and Taipei.
(Photo: Robert Ng / SCMP)
13 In Hong Kong SAR, China, one of the
initial cities of the SARS outbreak, people exhibited caution and concern for their risk of infection, according to telephone surveys. Many of the respondents also exhibited perceptions of the virus, which translated to an overall avoidance on leaving their homes, which includes using public transportation to get around (Lau et al., 2003). Similar to Taipei, a mask culture also emerged with this outbreak, as people became more aware about how the virus is spread, and considered it as a civic duty, for the good of public health, to be wearing one when presenting flu-like symptoms (Lau et al., 2003). The public perception of facial masks in East Asia illustrate a notion to protect both the wearer and/or others from illness; where those in Hong Kong face the additional cultural norm with masks that are associated with SARS, as an object of solidarity (H. Leung, 2020).
The Hong Kong Centre for Health
Protection, in their checklist of guidelines in combating SARS, suggested that public transport sectors be given guidance on health and sanitation procedures to workers from the Transport and Health Departments of the region (n.d.). This suggests that public transport in Hong Kong, under official government guidance, was to operate as normal and not have any restrictive measures like physical distancing be put in place.
A survey conducted in 2005 by Sadique et al. (2007) asked people of five European nations and three Asian regions that were affected by SARS, examining the behaviours of people in association with a perceived threat of pandemic influenza
found that over 54% of respondents in 6 of the 8 regions identified public transport as the riskiest setting to be in, with avoiding public transport altogether as the most common form of precautionary behaviour.
Additionally, during SARS, travel demand on public transportation is found to be heavily affected by the perceived risk of infection among the public, where transport service providers may face a large financial loss of revenues as a result of these precautionary measures (Sadique et al., 2007).
A shift also existed, turning away from collective public transportation to more isolated methods of transportation, such as cycling and automobiles, especially within mainland Chinese cities. In Beijing, at the beginning of the outbreak, bicycle shops saw a significant and rapid increase in bicycle sales, almost up to 4 times the normal sales for one shopkeeper (Buckley, 2003). In Shanghai, bicycle sales also reported a significant increase, with the
Past Pandemic Responses
14
Public Security Bureau reporting a total of 120,000 new bicycles being registered in April 2003, compared with a monthly average of 50,000 in 2002 (Verhovek, 2003). Education officials in China also advised students and education staff nationwide to cycle, as a means to be more active and reduce exposure on public transport (Verhovek, 2003).
At the same time, the automobile industry in China saw additional boost in sales with the outbreak, also in due part to the SARS outbreak (Zhao, 2004). One Shanghai auto manufacturer saw a 32% increase in April 2003 sales compared to 2002, while a car dealership reported a 15% increase in monthly sales from the previous month (Verhovek, 2003). However, the choice to switch to a car is heavily based on capability to pay; where for some this may not be possible or feasible at all (Verhovek, 2003).
Unlike the response to COVID-19, most governments and authorities did not enact measures that restricted the movement of people and/or supported physical distancing among the population; even where the risk of transmission was
relatively the same among COVID-19 and SARS. However, the community response to the virus was very much precautionary and in an abundance of caution, particularly with voluntary avoidance of crowded places and public transportation, as well as the voluntary wearing of masks among the population.
Influenza A
(H1N1), 2009
The H1N1 Influenza A strain was a novel influenza type that emerged in 2009 in North America, with initial cases emerging from the United States (CDC, 2009). With initial cases developing in California in early April, by the end of the month, there was significant evidence of spread within several different states, across the entire country (CDC, 2010).
This strain of H1N1 virus differed from seasonal influenza virus strains; with humans lacking the appropriate antibodies against the pandemic strain of the virus, presented higher levels of infection and spread, and had caused abnormal patterns of death among healthy and young
individuals, along with existing at-risk groups for influenza (WHO, 2010). Those infected with the virus exhibit common flu symptoms like fever, coughing, sore throat, runny nose, and fatigue (WHO, 2010).
Similar to SARS, as influenza is commonly known to be spread through droplets, this outbreak also presents challenges to the transportation sector in managing the spread of the virus, and the inherent enclosed nature of public transportation.
In the United States, transit agencies are often ill-suited in responding to public health crises, where they will respond reactively based on Centers for Disease Control (CDC) advice (Faass et al., 2013).
In the United Kingdom, people were
encouraged by the National Health Service (NHS) to practise personal hygiene as the virus broke out in the country, and there was never any NHS campaign on the effectiveness of avoiding public transport as a measure of controlling the spread (Rubin et al., 2010).
Past Pandemic Responses
Figure 2: In Mexico City, the response to the H1N1 influenza outbreak included mandatory mask policies aboard its public transportation network, with the military deployed to distribute masks and ensure compliance.
(Photo: Gary Denness / Flickr [CC BY-NC-SA 2.0])
15 At the same time, populations in many
urban centres either continued to exercise precautionary behaviours, in the case of cities that have experienced SARS some years back, or have started to adopt precautionary behaviours in their day-to- day lives. In Hong Kong, while the initial threat of H1N1 was not deemed as serious to the population, precautionary measures such as wearing face masks and avoiding crowded spaces were already in use by residents around when the first confirmed case occurred in May 2009 (Lau et al., 2009).
A further survey by Jones and Salathé (2009) saw that its respondents, mainly from the United States, reported changes in behaviour in proactive preventative measures like frequent hand washing, avoiding public places and travel to affected areas, and avoiding those with a perceived infection. These findings are further drawn to a relationship between the perceived risk and anxiety towards contraction of the virus, as people adjusted their behaviours accordingly (Jones &
Salathé, 2009).
In the United States, the H1N1 pandemic also highlighted racial disparities in exposure to the virus and mitigation tactics. Quinn et al. (2011) highlighted that persons of colour were more at risk of contracting the virus in environments of crowding, particularly on public transport.
This is due in part with speculations of persons of colour and other racialized minorities lacking abilities to work from home and social/physical distance, sometimes by nature of their occupation, in addition to a dependence on public transportation services for their mobility, where 63% of public transport users are from minority groups (Quinn et al., 2011).
Mexico City, however, had a different response than other cities to the
outbreak of the pandemic. Similar to how governments worldwide are responding to COVID-19, officials in Mexico effectively placed the city and surrounding state in lockdown, closing schools and other leisure facilities to enforce social distancing
(Wilkinson & Maugh II, 2009). Mexico City’s metro system is one of the world’s top busiest in ridership, carrying an average of 3.8 million people daily (Gobierno de la Ciudad de México, 2009).
While the system remained in regular service during the city’s lockdown, military personnel were posted at metro stations and handing out face masks for riders, on advice of the government (Lacey & Malkin, 2009). Additionally, bus and taxi drivers were faced with mandatory face mask wearing as a requirement for operation of service; this saw increased compliance with drivers for donning masks, and
comparatively less than metro passengers, where there was only a voluntary mask requirement (Condon & Sinha, 2010). There were also considerations to close the public transport system as part of lockdown
measures (Gammell & Grillo, 2009).
Past Pandemic Responses
16
17
Transportation Amid a Crisis
The former disease outbreaks of SARS and H1N1 did not create as large-scale of a crisis for public health and safety as COVID-19. With the outbreak of this novel coronavirus disease, transportation systems are seeing a significant shift in how and why people move around. Systems across the world are undergoing a massive decline in transportation demand due to a large proportion of populations being asked, or demanded, to stay home and limit nonessential movement as much as possible, whether by means of emergency legislation and/or voluntary work-from-home policies from the private workforce. The massive scale of the outbreak also influenced the market for oil and other fossil fuels, which has a direct impact on the economic factor of
transportation systems. Moving forward, how has this outbreak shaped a greater demand for space between humans on transport, and what effects has this placed on our
environment?
Left photo: Craig Cook / Unsplash
Transportation Amid a Crisis
18
The former disease outbreaks of SARS and H1N1 did not create as large-scale of a crisis for public health and safety as COVID-19. With the outbreak of this novel coronavirus disease, transportation systems are seeing a significant shift in how and why people move around.
Systems across the world are undergoing a massive decline in transportation demand due to a large proportion of populations being asked, or demanded, to stay home and limit nonessential movement as much as possible, whether by means of emergency legislation and/or voluntary work-from-home policies from the private workforce. The massive scale of the outbreak also influenced the market for oil and other fossil fuels, which has a direct impact on the economic factor of transportation systems. Moving forward, how has this outbreak shaped a greater demand for space between humans on transport, and what effects has this placed on our environment?
A Global Decline in Transportation
Across almost all urban centres globally, the demand for urban transportation has declined drastically since the outbreak of the virus. The transportation system, as an essential service, becomes extremely vulnerable in its ability to transmit diseases and viruses, yet many lack the appropriate response tools or systems in effectively being able to prevent such spread (Faass et al., 2013). With the declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic by the WHO, countries and local governments were quick to impose
restrictive measures that help limit the spread of the virus, such as shelters-in- place or lockdown orders. These measures limit the movement of people, with people only leaving their homes for essential matters, such as grocery shopping and medical appointments.
Major companies, to the likes of Apple, Google, Amazon, among many others, worldwide, have asked and implemented work-from-home policies to its employees, as a measure to further limit the spread of the virus (Hadden et al., 2020). The transportation system and its capacity in almost all cities are often designed for a morning and afternoon peak commuter culture (Papandreou, 2020). By having those employees who regularly commute work remotely where they are able to, it drastically reduces the demand for transportation.
As a result, the demand for public transport service has effectively been left at a standstill, leaving only essential workers using services. In North America, transit agencies have seen a 60-80%
decrease in passengers in March, at the height of the outbreak across US and Canadian cities (Transit App, 2020). In the same time period, European systems saw an over 80% decrease in ridership, as many countries imposed lockdown measures which prohibited non-essential movements, and is heavily enforced (Griswold, 2020). The Asian public transport sector did not see as much of a decrease, with Google data in Hong Kong showing a 45% decrease in public transport ridership (J. Q. Huang, 2020);
where Taipei has only seen a decrease
Transportation Amid a Crisis
Transportation Amid a Crisis
Figure 3: As cities in Europe and North America were facing their first cases of COVID-19 and implementing lockdown measures, the demand for travel in urban centres dropped significantly, and facilities saw little to no traffic, like here at Zürich Hauptbanhof (central station).
(Photo: Ellen Jenni / Unsplash)
19 of 15-16% of riders on its metro system
through February and March (Levy, 2020).
The Transport Economics of a Pandemic
Crude oil prices worldwide have seen significant drops in value throughout the spring, as a result of the onset of COVID-19. On 20 April 2020, the benchmark U.S. crude oil price reached a historic low of US-$37.63; where oil traders were willing to pay US$37.63 to buyers to purchase a barrel of crude oil, rather than buyers paying the trader for a barrel of oil (Domonoske, 2020).
This is largely in response to a global shutdown of all oil-dependent industries like manufacturing and transportation, as governments began to impose large, sweeping measures in an effort to curb the spread of COVID-19. Oil producers, at that point, have been presented with surpluses of approximately 16 million barrels of oil per week in April; such that the overall demand for oil has dropped to levels last seen in the 1990s, and the consumer price of such oil products, like gasoline, reflecting that (Tagliapietra, 2020).
As economies began to reopen and loosen restrictions from May onwards, the global demand in oil saw its rebound, gradually bringing it back to a more stable level (Krauss, 2020). In other global oil markets, drops in crude oil prices have also forced other global oil producers to examine their overall oil outputs and readjust their supplies to further stabilize the industry;
though demand may not return to pre- pandemic levels and may be difficult to
pick back up again once global economic activity further restarts (Krauss, 2020;
Tagliapietra, 2020). While the relationship of global oil decline and COVID-19 are highly related, Arezki and Nguyen (2020) argue that these two occurrences are distinct, in that there are two shocks to the industry: the demand-based shock, which has occurred with the initial decrease in oil consumption from economic shutdowns;
the second shock to the industry being based on the supply, where the surplus in oil reserves would continue to drive oil prices low for a more prolonged period.
This global decline in oil consumption is directly attributed to the decline in economic activity worldwide. As countries placed their initial response to COVID-19 to close all non-essential businesses and industries, highly encouraging residents to remain home to flatten the curve of infections, the successive, and potentially unintentional, consequences of these rash
Transportation Amid a Crisis
20
measures is that the economic output, i.e.
producers and manufacturers making and selling goods and services and people purchasing these goods and services, would face significant drops (Arezki &
Nguyen, 2020). Transportation systems are critical in the economic development and success of society; where the most efficient systems lead to a greater overall success, economic opportunities and benefits, while those that are less efficient may face challenges, in a significant reduction of economic opportunities, and potentially lower qualities of life (Rodrigue, 2020).
Almost all publicly-funded transportation systems in North America and Western European countries, including roadways, gather a large portion of their operating and capital revenue from a diversion of funds by local, state/regional and national levels of government, which are often derived from the collection of a combination of property taxes, sales taxes, fuel taxes, or income taxes; this is in addition to fare revenue collected by passengers (HDR Corporation, 2015;
Transportation Research Board, 2001). With COVID-19 placing the world economy into a significant recession, people and private businesses are spending less money on goods and services across almost all worldwide sectors of industry, which may be a trend for consumers longer term into the future, i.e. more permanently (Gopinath, 2020; World Economic Forum, 2020). As a result, with people spending less in general, there is less tax revenue that could be levied by governments, which in turn would produce a smaller budget of funding that is available to be dispersed to programs like transportation.
For example, TransLink, the regional transportation authority for Metro Vancouver, Canada, has been facing
financial troubles since the initial decline in demand as a result of COVID-19. Part of the agency’s funding comes from the collection of taxes imposed on gasoline sales in the region, along with a portion of property, parking and electricity taxes and levies, and user fees such as transit fares, and bridge tolls before 31 August 2017; these, for the most part, go into the continued operation of the transit network, along with capital investment and maintenance of other portfolios under TransLink’s governance (Robinson, 2013;
Smith, 2017).
Such that TransLink saw over 80% of its ridership decrease since mid-March, when the virus began to hit North American countries, combined with the suspension of fare collection on buses, have contributed to a significant decline in funding for the system. The further decrease of 60% of gas tax revenues, as a direct result of most car owners staying home and not requiring as significant fuel purchases as before, have placed the agency in a precarious situation (TransLink, 2020d). Traditionally, gas tax revenues are diverted to the operational budget of the system, like in the expansion of bus service, and towards capital
expenses like fleet procurement across all modes of service, such as buses, SkyTrain rail, and SeaBus ferry (TransLink, n.d.).
In April 2020, the agency announced that they are facing significant financial shortfall amid the pandemic, losing to the likes of CA$75 million (about US$55 million) monthly from lost revenue, calling for urgent financial support from the provincial and federal governments; else they face the consequences of drastic and significant service reductions, cancellations of entire routes, to a point where extremely bare-bones levels of service would be in place (Scott, 2020).
Transportation Amid a Crisis
Figure 4: While the global economy shuts down as a result of the virus, transportation systems must remain in place and in service to ensure the movement of people and goods. Many transport systems have enforced that access to their network be only for essential workers like healthcare workers, grocery/pharmacy staff, and the like; these measures limit the spread of COVID-19 among the populace, and ensures that essential workers are able to get around in a safe manner.
(Photo: Daniel Lee / Unsplash)
21
The Need for Space
In the midst of a global health outbreak, where those working non-essential jobs are either asked or demanded to stay home, society does not cease to function (J. Walker, 2020). With the spread of COVID-19 associated with microscopic droplets between people, the need for space and distancing among the population in the remaining essential interactions, such as grocery shopping and medical appointments, becomes greater. For cities and urban centres, this becomes a challenge, as transportation vehicles are confined spaces, and as people crowd together in such closed spaces, there exists a greater likelihood of having the virus spread (CBC News, 2020a). The transportation system remains as an essential service during a pandemic, carrying other essential workers to and from their places of work, such as hospitals, grocery stores, among other points on the supply chain in delivering much needed medical supplies as well as food supply for our nourishment (J. Walker, 2020).
Social/physical distancing regulations that have been imposed by various governments across the world to ensure adequate space between people that will minimize the spread of viral droplets. Such rules dictate that people are to be about 1.5 to 2 metres apart from one another, as that is an assumed safe distance where droplets do not become airborne and fall to the ground (Goldman, 2020).
Public transportation agencies have taken measures to ensure that adequate space is provided to the remaining essential workers that are dependent on the service, such as modifying service levels to match the current demand for transit, closing
seats to ensure social/physical distancing between passengers (WSP Canada, 2020);
some agencies are also continuing to run high capacity vehicles on their modified weekend service schedules (which are significantly less frequent than weekday schedules), to allow passengers to spread out within the vehicle (J. Walker, 2020).
Given the confined nature of public transport vehicles, the higher potential to spread COVID-19, and a greater risk of infection, some have chosen to use cycling as a means to move around on essential journeys. Compared to other methods of moving about, save for private automobiles, cycling allows people to remain active, get fresh air while out running errands, and can easily maintain the minimum physical distance between other people and cyclists (P. Walker, 2020).
Precisely with the circumstances of this
outbreak, and the immediate decrease in
Transportation Amid a Crisis
22
automobile traffic on roads, many urban dwellers are seeing a new opportunity to cycle in a safe manner. For some, cycling may be one of the only safe and viable options, especially those in lower income groups living in cities, where public transportation services are at a bare- bones service level, and measures being implemented in some jurisdictions to provide more space for cyclists are helping to encourage cycling (Chung, 2020).
In dense urban centres, the prevalence of bike sharing programs and other new mobility programs like electric kick-
scooters have contributed to the shift from public transportation to cycling during the course of this pandemic. New York City has seen a drastic increase in cyclists at the start of the outbreak in March, before the establishment of shelter-in-place orders, seeing an increase of 67% in ridership on Citi Bike, the city’s bike sharing program, compared to the previous year; in addition, the city saw about 50% increase in
crossings by bicycles on East River bridges connecting Manhattan to Brooklyn and Queens (Hu, 2020).
Bike share usage has also seen significant increase in other cities like Philadelphia, Chicago, and Beijing, either as cities begin to experience the effects of the virus, in the cases of Philadelphia and Chicago, or as cities begin to reopen their economy, in the case of Beijing. (Hu, 2020; Liu, Xue
& Huang, 2020; Murphy, 2020). According to some, their motivations to switch to cycling during this time have been to avoid subways and buses, where there exists potential for infection from touching surfaces and from other passengers (Hu, 2020).
For those who live close to the essentials they require to run errands for, walking is a suitable means to get around, so long as they maintain minimum physical distance.
However, there are challenges in this, as many city sidewalks often lack the width to accommodate two or more people walking together or past each other at the safe distance of at least 1.5 to 2 metres, where they may be narrow by design, or are occupied by obstacles (Harris & Rothman, 2020). To this, the need for pedestrian space has spilled out to the roadway, as many cities have reallocated road space for pedestrians and cyclists, allowing them to spread out and ensure minimum physical distancing requirements are met; these include closing lanes or entire streets to cars, making sidewalks unidirectional, temporarily closing on-street parking spaces, among others (MacFarlane, 2020;
National League of Cities, 2020).
Environmental Impacts
With a drastic downturn in commuting traffic and carriage on the transportation system, many cities have been noting a significant decrease in greenhouse gas emissions. Cities throughout China and northern Italy have noticed significant
Transportation Amid a Crisis
Figure 5: Cycling became a very popular option for people to move around the city as COVID-19 spread across the world, with bike share systems seeing significant ridership increases in many urban centres.
(Photo: Nextbike / Unsplash)
23 drops in air pollution, specifically in nitrous
dioxide emissions, in February and March, respectively, as each region underwent restrictive lockdown measures that placed residents inside their homes (Mortillaro, 2020). Wuhan, China, the initial epicentre of the outbreak, saw an approximate 10- 30% drop in air pollution after Lunar New Year celebrations in early February, as most workers would normally return to work;
northern Italy, the European epicentre of the outbreak, saw an approximate 10%
decrease per week in air pollution, as the entire country went into lockdown in early March (Mortillaro, 2020).
Other urban centres across the world are also seeing significant changes in air quality as measures of restriction are put in place by local or national governments.
Cities like Hong Kong, Kyoto, Seoul and Shanghai, which were all affected by COVID-19 immediately after Wuhan and were placed into emergency measures, reported a drop in air quality indices in comparison to previous years, which measures a variety of greenhouse gas emissions like fine and coarse particulate matter, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and carbon monoxide, according to a preprint study (Cadotte, 2020). Major Canadian cities have also seen a 30-40%
decrease in air pollution as a result of less road traffic, and offices and industries being closed to limit the spread of the virus (Rabson, 2020).
Another study, placed in preprint, suggests that one’s exposure to air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, studied as fine air particulate matter, may have a correlation with COVID-19 mortality rates, where a small increase in long-term exposure to such air pollution presents an increased vulnerability to severe outcomes of COVID-19, such as death (Wu, Nethery et
al., 2020). The study draws from previous study findings on the increased risk of severe outcomes of respiratory diseases (such as the 1918 Spanish influenza, SARS, and H1N1) from exposure to air pollution, and adds additional analysis of this correlation between air pollution and COVID-19 mortality rates in 3,000 US counties (Wu, Yu et al., 2020). The authors of the study recognize that this study is limited, in that the COVID-19 pandemic is still ongoing, and higher quality data is unavailable for more detailed analysis.
The rapid decrease in air pollution that we see is only given as a result of drastic emergency measures imposed by governments. There runs a risk, and a greater concern, that once these cities reopen their economies, and air pollutant levels will return to pre-pandemic, normal, levels - which often are extremely high and harming to the environment and human health (Gerretsen, 2020). Transportation systems account for 23% of global carbon emissions, and is an industry that is heavily dependent on fossil fuels (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2018).
People have to realize, and take into consideration, the effect of their
transportation habits to the environment;
some suggest that times of change, like the pandemic and a prolonged period of non-participation (i.e. not commuting to and from work), can result in a positive change in behaviour for the long-term that are lasting (Henriques, 2020). As a result, scholars and environmental leaders are calling for governments, and people, to review their fossil fuel use and carbon footprint, enacting policies and ensuring their post-pandemic recovery is one that is sustainable and green (Gerretsen, 2020).
Transportation Amid a Crisis
24
25
Case Studies
Using case studies as the primary method of investigation highlights the circumstances of which COVID-19 developed in various jurisdictions, the variety of response measures implemented in the initial outbreaks of the virus, locally, and allows for comparison in similarities and differences in approach by governments, agencies, and organizations.
Left photo: Andrew Cashin / MTA NYCT (CC BY 2.0)
Case Studies
26
Using case studies as the primary method of investigation highlights the circumstances of which COVID-19 developed in various jurisdictions, the variety of response measures implemented in the initial outbreaks of the virus,
locally, and allows for comparison in similarities and differences in approach by governments, agencies, and organizations.
The cities chosen for case study examination reflects an adequate distribution among large population centres in North America, Europe, and Asia, and contains cities that have experienced higher concentrations of community spread, as well as initial outbreak areas as the virus began to develop and
spread. These cities are Toronto (Canada), Vancouver (Canada), New York City (United
States), San Francisco (United States), Milan (Italy), Berlin (Germany), Hong Kong SAR (China), and Taipei (Taiwan).
A comparative summary table of key measures and responses is also attached in Appendix A.
The page directly opposite explains some of the graphic features that will summarize the general response measures that the municipality, regional, or national governments have taken, generally in the public health perspective, to curb and limit the spread of the virus at its initial outbreak. Additionally, measures or events of important significance will also be displayed in a linear timeline format, which aids in understanding the temporal development of response in each city.
Case Studies
Figure 6: Overview map of cities selected for case study.
TORONTO, CA VANCOUVER, CA NEW YORK CITY, US SAN FRANCISCO, US MILAN, IT BERLIN, DE HONG KONG SAR, CN TAIPEI, TW
Case Studies
Date
Measure Date
Measure Date
Measure
27 Case Studies
How to Read the Case Studies
Figure 7: Example of iconography as seen in ‘Generic Measures/Responses Taken’
Figure 8: Example of response timeline and its components
The case studies follow a standard format in outlining each city/region’s response to the initial outbreak of COVID-19 in early spring 2020. The initial response section first looks at how the city/region saw its arrival of the virus with its first cases and deaths, and the public health advice and guidance that were issued by the relevant
authorities. Next, the general responses from each city/region are outlined, such as emergency orders that were issued in the name of public health. Then, the individual measures relating to the public transportation and active transportation networks are examined.
NO SHELTER-IN-
PLACE ORDER MORE THAN 5
PROHIBITED PUBLIC INDOOR SPACES CLOSED ALL FOREIGNERS
PROHIBITED STATE OF
EMERGENCY
Figure 6, above, is an example of what accompanies the section on the general response measures for each city in the case studies. They provide a simple overview on what governments of all levels in the city/region have implemented to its residents to curb the spread of the virus at the larger scale. The icons indicate whether the generic measures were called by the government(s) in the region through the transparency of the icon, and the text underneath summarizes the measure put in place.
At the end of each city’s case study, there will also be a timeline of
COVID-19 development and response measures, which provides a linear, visual representation of how COVID-19 has affected that city and the transportation system through the first months of 2020.
The colours of the measures in the timeline also illustrate the type of event or response measure, as seen in Figure 7, below.
BLACK: COVID-19 DEVELOPMENTS AND BROAD, GENERAL RESPONSE
GREEN: PUBLIC TRANSPORT
RESPONSE MEASURES RED: ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION RESPONSE MEASURES
28
Toronto, Canada
POPULATION: 2,731,571 (2016, STATSCAN) AS OF 31 MAY 2020
CONFIRMED COVID-19 CASES: 11,338 CONFIRMED COVID-19 DEATHS: 828
Timeline and Initial Response
Timeline of COVID-19 outbreak
As of 31 May 2020, there have been 11,338 confirmed positive cases and 828 deaths related to COVID-19 in the City of Toronto (City of Toronto, 2020d).
The first COVID-19 case in Toronto was recorded on 25 January 2020, with a patient returning from Wuhan, and was placed into negative pressure isolation;
subsequent cases within Toronto during January and February were sporadic and were resolved (City of Toronto, 2020d;
Ontario Ministry of Health, 2020). The first death in Toronto was recorded on 8 March 2020 (City of Toronto, 2020d). Throughout March, the City of Toronto saw a rapid increase in active, confirmed cases, and several suspected cases of community spread that were under investigation (City of Toronto, 2020d, Feinstein, 2020).
Public Health advisories (national, regional and local levels)
Public health advice from all levels of government (national, provincial and local) have advised passengers travelling within affected areas to self-isolate for 14 days and monitor for symptoms of COVID-19 upon their return to Canada throughout February and March (de Villa, 2020a).
The Public Health Agency of Canada has also implemented an Emergency Order under the Quarantine Act on 25 March 2020, requiring all travellers returning to Canada to self-isolate and monitor for symptoms for 14 days, where those failing to comply face fines and/or charges (Public Health Agency of Canada, 2020). Further recommendations from the Toronto Public Health on 1 April implements the new orders from the Public Health Agency of Canada, and introduces stronger social/
physical distancing measures, and a stronger direction to stay and remain home unless for essentials (Toronto Public Health, 2020).
Case Studies
29
General Measures/Responses Taken
(AT NATIONAL, REGIONAL, OR LOCAL LEVELS)
NO SHELTER-IN-
PLACE ORDER MORE THAN 5
PROHIBITED PUBLIC INDOOR SPACES CLOSED ALL FOREIGNERS
PROHIBITED STATE OF
EMERGENCY
State of emergency or similar decree The Province of Ontario declared a state of emergency on 17 March 2020, requiring recreational and leisure facilities, schools, and dine-in restaurants to be closed immediately, along with mass gathering restrictions of fifty or more people (Office of the Premier of Ontario, 2020a). All non- essential businesses are ordered to be closed as of 23 March 2020 (Office of the Premier of Ontario, 2020b).
Foreign travel restrictions
The government of Canada, on 18 March 2020, imposed entry restrictions on all international travellers. All international flights are required to land at 4 specified international airports across the country;
Toronto Pearson International Airport is one of the specified airports (Government of Canada, 2020a). Border restrictions are also in place, limiting entry only to Canadian citizens, permanent residents, and foreign nationals performing essential work (Government of Canada, 2020c).
Shelter-in-place restrictions
The City of Toronto, nor the Province of Ontario, did not establish shelter-in-place restrictions.
Mass gathering restrictions
The Ontario state of emergency also imposes mass gathering restrictions, initially prohibiting gatherings of fifty people or more (Office of the Premier of Ontario, 2020a). These restrictions were further tightened to gatherings of no more than five people, with exceptions only towards private households of five or more people, childcare for first responders (capped at 50), and funerals (capped at 10) (Office of the Premier of Ontario, 2020c).
Closures of public spaces
Enclosed public spaces in Toronto, such as libraries and recreational facilities are closed pursuant to the state of emergency orders issued by the province. Open-air facilities such as public squares and parks remain open for walk-through, with high- contact amenities where people may congregate like playground structures, barbecues, zoos, and farms closed (City of Toronto, 2020c).
Toronto, Canada
Figure 9: The Toronto Transit Commission, as part of the initial outbreak response to COVID-19, instituted rear door boarding policies on all buses to prevent close contact between passengers and the operator.
(Photo: Swire Chin / Flickr [CC BY-NC 2.0])
