local transport plans in san sebastian reviewed and considering

CITIES DEMONSTRATING AUTOMATED ROAD PASSANGER TRANSPORT

Local transport plans in San Sebastian reviewed and au-tomated road transport system assessment

SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

THEME SST.2012.3.1-4.

AUTOMATED URBAN VEHICLES

COLLABORATIVE PROJECT – GRANT AGREEMENT N°: 314190

Work Package WP.11

Deliverable number D11.1

Authors Jesús Murgoitio (TECNALIA); María Izaguirre (NOVADAYS)

Co‐authors Arkaitz Urquiza (TECNALIA)

Authors’ affiliation 1. TECNALIA; 2. NOVADAYS

Status

Dissemination level (PU/PP/RE/CO)

Delivery date (planned): M14‐31.10.2013

Delivery date (actual): M15‐15.11.2013

Page | 2 D(11.01) Local transport plans in San Sebastian reviewed , version28

Document control sheet

Title Local transport plans in San Sebastian reviewed and automated road transport system assessment

Creator WP11

Editor WP11

Brief Description

This document reports the reviewed mobility plan in San Sebastian city, hereafter SS, oriented to assess the full potentials of cybercars for their mobil-ity following a common methodology, defined in WP1, in order to generate same indicators and lead to full cost benefit analyses of the alternative solu-tions based on automated transport systems. So, this document is a general transport plan revised including, where mostly suited, cybercars and a num-ber of possible demonstrations and use cases.

Publisher

Contributors WP11

Type (Deliverable/Milestone) Deliverable

Format Word

Creation date 14.01.2013

Version number V28

Version date 15.11.2013

Last modified by Jesús Murgoitio

Rights

Dissemination level internal public restricted, access granted to: EU Commission

Action requested to be revised by Partners involved in the preparation of the deliverable for approval of the WP Manager for approval of the Internal Reviewer (if required) for approval of the Project Co-ordinator

Deadline for approval

Version Date Modified by Comments

Boxtext


Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................... 7

1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 8

1.1 BACKGROUND ....................................................................................................... 8 1.2 ROLE AND STRUCTURE OF THIS DOCUMENT ............................................................ 8

2. CITY AND LOCAL TRANSPORT SYSTEM SITUATION DESCRIPTION ..... 10

2.1 DESCRIPTION OF THE CITY OF SAN SEBASTIAN ..................................................... 10 2.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE LOCAL TRANSPORT SYSTEM ............................................... 18

3. PROBLEMS, OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED IMPACTS ............................. 33

3.1 PROBLEMS .......................................................................................................... 33 3.2 OBJECTIVES ........................................................................................................ 35 3.3 IMPACTS EXPECTED ............................................................................................. 35

4. POTENTIAL SITE 1 DESCRIPTION .............................................................. 42

4.1 DEMAND ESTIMATION ........................................................................................... 43 4.2 SYSTEM PRE-DESIGN ........................................................................................... 51 4.3 INITIAL ASSESSMENT ............................................................................................ 52 4.4 INITIAL PRACTICAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSES ............................................................. 52





7. INTRA-CITY SITE SELECTION ..................................................................... 63

8. INITIAL EVALUATION ................................................................................... 64

9. SYSTEM DIMENSIONING ............................................................................. 71

10. EX-ANTE EVALUATION ................................................................................ 76

11. SOURCES ..................................................................................................... 83


11.1 REFERENCE LIST ................................................................................................. 83

ANNEX 1: QUESTIONNAIRE ............................................................................... 85

ANNEX 2: SURVEY RESULTS ............................................................................. 86

ANNEX 3: MOTIVATIONS OF THE USE OF AUTOMATED VEHICLES .............. 87

ANNEX 4: FIGURES OF USER PREFERENCES ................................................ 88


List of figures

FIGURE 1: LOCATION OF THE PROVINCE OF GIPUZKOA AND THE CITY OF DONOSTIA-SAN

SEBASTIÁN .................................................................................................................. 10 FIGURE 2 MAP OF THE CITY OF DONOSTIA-SAN SEBASTIÁN .................................................. 11 FIGURE 3: SAN SEBASTIAN TECHNOLOGY PARK ................................................................... 14 FIGURE 4: ORIGIN OF THE COMMUTE .................................................................................... 16 FIGURE 5: ENTRY AND EXIT TIMES ........................................................................................ 16 FIGURE 6: MODES OF TRANSPORT ....................................................................................... 17 FIGURE 7: REASONS FOR USING CARS AND PUBLIC TRANSPORT ............................................ 18 FIGURE 8: MAP OF CITY TRANSPORT IN DONOSTIA-SAN SEBASTIÁN (DBUS) .......................... 20 FIGURE 9: MAP OF LINE C1 BY RENFE DONOSTIA-SAN SEBASTIÁN ........................................ 21 FIGURE 10: MAP OF EUSKOTREN DONOSTIA-SAN SEBASTIÁN ............................................... 23 FIGURE 11: MAP OF THE CYCLE PATHS IN DONOSTIA-SAN SEBASTIÁN ................................... 24 FIGURE 12: VERTICAL TRANSPORT SYSTEMS IN DONOSTIA-SAN SEBASTIÁN .......................... 25 FIGURE 13: MAP OF LINE 28 ................................................................................................ 26 FIGURE 14: MAP OF LINE 31 ................................................................................................ 27 FIGURE 15: MAP OF LINE 35 ................................................................................................ 28 FIGURE 16: LOCATIONS OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT STOPS IN MIRAMÓN ............................... 30 FIGURE 17: INTEGRATED MAP OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT SYSTEM IN MIRAMÓN .................... 32 FIGURE 18: MAIN MOBILITY PROBLEMS IN THE PARK ............................................................. 33 FIGURE 19: TWO MAIN PROBLEMATIC AREAS IN MIRAMON TECHNOLOGY PARK ...................... 34 FIGURE 20: AREA OF POTENTIAL SITE 1 ................................................................................ 42 FIGURE 21: PRE-DESIGN OF SITE 1 ...................................................................................... 51 FIGURE 22: AREA OF POTENTIAL SITE 2 ................................................................................ 54 FIGURE 23: SYSTEM PRE-DESIGN OF SITE 2 .......................................................................... 56 FIGURE 24: AREA OF POTENTIAL SITE 3 ................................................................................ 59 FIGURE 25: SYSTEM PRE-DESIGN OF SITE 3 .......................................................................... 61 FIGURE 26: FIGURE ABOUT QUESTION “ARE YOU INTERESTED IN THIS SERVICE?”................... 71 FIGURE 27: FIGURE FOR CHOICE “SCENARIO 1” .................................................................... 72 FIGURE 28: FIGURE FOR CHOICE “SCENARIO 2” .................................................................... 72 FIGURE 29: FIGURE FOR CHOICE “SCENARIO 3” .................................................................... 73 FIGURE 30: FIGURE FOR CHOICE “SCENARIO 4” .................................................................... 73 FIGURE 31: SELECTED SITE ................................................................................................. 75


List of tables

TABLE 1: COMBINED TRANSPORT TO THE PARK .................................................................... 31 TABLE 2: IMPACTS EXPECTED .............................................................................................. 36 TABLE 3: DEMAND ESTIMATION - PASSENGERS ON THE ARTS PER DAY (SITE 1) .................... 44 TABLE 4: DEMAND ESTIMATION - PURPOSE ........................................................................... 44 TABLE 5: DEMAND ESTIMATION - CURRENT TRANSPORT MODE .............................................. 45 TABLE 6: DEMAND ESTIMATION - TRANSPORT MODE WITH ARTS........................................... 47 TABLE 7: DEMAND ESTIMATION - MODE OF TRANSPORT IN COMPETITION WITH THE ARTS ...... 49 TABLE 8: DEMAND ESTIMATION - SUMMARY FROM THE SYSTEM PREDESIGN ........................... 51 TABLE 9: DEMAND ESTIMATION - PASSENGERS ON THE ARTS PER DAY (SITE 2) .................... 55 TABLE 10: DEMAND ESTIMATION - SUMMARY FROM THE SYSTEM PREDESIGN (SITE 2) ............ 57 TABLE 11: DEMAND ESTIMATION - PASSENGERS ON THE ARTS PER DAY (SITE 3) .................. 60 TABLE 12: DEMAND ESTIMATION - SUMMARY FROM THE SYSTEM PREDESIGN (SITE 3) ............ 62 TABLE 13: IMPACTS EXPECTED - THRESHOLDS ..................................................................... 65 TABLE 14: SYSTEM DIMENSIONING – SCENARIO 1 ................................................................. 72 TABLE 15: SYSTEM DIMENSIONING – SCENARIO 2 ................................................................. 72 TABLE 16: SYSTEM DIMENSIONING – SCENARIO 3 ................................................................. 73 TABLE 17: SYSTEM DIMENSIONING – SCENARIO 4 ................................................................. 73 TABLE 18: SYSTEM DIMENSIONING – SUMMARY .................................................................... 74 TABLE 19: IMPACTS EXPECTED - COMPARISON ..................................................................... 77


Executive summary

This document reports the reviewed mobility plan in San Sebastian city, hereaf-ter SS, oriented to assess the full potentials of cybercars for their mobility following a common methodology, defined in WP1, in order to generate same indicators and lead to full cost benefit analyses of the alternative solutions based on automated transport systems. So, this document is a general transport plan revised including, where mostly suited, cybercars and a number of possible demonstrations and use cases.


1. Introduction

1.1 Background

European cities face four main problems related to mobility: congestion, land use, safety and environmental issues. One of the main causes of such problems is the car-ownership rate. The centres of large cities address this issue combining effi-cient mass transits with car restriction policies, but peripheral areas and smaller cit-ies remain dominated by private cars.

CityMobil has demonstrated that automation of road vehicles can lead to differ-ent transport concepts, from partly automated car-share schemes through Cyber-Cars and PRT, to Advanced BRT, which can make urban mobility more sustainable. However CityMobil has also highlighted three main barriers to the deployment of au-tomated road vehicles: the implementation framework, the legal framework and the unknown wider economic effect.

The goal of CityMobil2 is to address these barriers and finally to remove them. To smooth the implementation process CityMobil2 will remove the uncertainties, which presently hamper procurement and implementation of automated road transport systems.

On one hand CityMobil2 features 12 cities, which will revise their mobility plans and adopt automated road transport systems, wherever they prove effective. Then, CityMobil2 will select the best 5 cases (among the 12 cities) to organise automated road transport systems demonstrators. The project will procure two sets of automat-ed transport systems and deliver them to the five most motivated cities, which will host demonstrations for a period of 6 to 8 months.

1.2 Role and structure of this document

Based on the "Common methodology definition for city studies" defined in WP1, which contains the guidelines to carry out the city studies, and “Site selection and evaluation methodologies”, indicating the methodology that will be implemented to select the 5 cities, this document reports the reviewed mobility plan in San Sebas-tian city, hereafter SS, oriented to assess the full potentials of cybercars for their mobility following a common methodology in order to generate same indicators and lead to full cost benefit analyses of the alternative solutions based on automated transport systems. So, this document is a general transport plan revised including, where mostly suited, cybercars and a number of possible demonstrations and use cases.

The first section is the introduction to this “local transport plans in SS reviewed and automated road transport system assessment” with background, role and struc-ture of the document.

The second section reports the SS local transport system situation description to be filled with the outcomes of the diagnosis phase.


The third section explains the problems, Objectives,and expected impacts filled with the outcomes of the definition of the objectives phase and of the potential im-pacts phase.

In the next sections, a complete description for each potential site in SS is de-scribed, one section for each potential site, with the outcomes of the demand esti-mation, system pre-desig, the initial assessment, and finally the initial practical fea-sibility analyses.

Following the description corresponding to the last potential site in SS, the called “Intra city site selection” section with the outcomes of the intra-city site selection phase is reported.

Next section is filled with the outcomes of the initial evaluation step followed by the design/system dimensioning and the ex-ante evaluation steps.

Finally, the list of references and annexes are reported.


2. City and local transport system situation description

2.1 Description of the city of San Sebastian

The city of San Sebastián is a coastal city, located in a metropolitan area on the Spanish Atlantic Coast. It hasa population of 247.645 inhabitants1,and the central city lies in a bay between two hills.Half the population lives in flat areas at river banks of Urumea river and the other half in hilly areas. The proximity to the French border contributes to large amounts of international traffic for passengers and goods.

Figure 1: Location of the province of Gipuzkoa and the city of Donostia-San Sebastián

1 Eustat: Municipal Population Statistics, 28/05/2012


Figure 2 Map of the city of Donostia-San Sebastián

The municipality of Donostia-San Sebastián is part of the Donostia-San Sebas-

tián metropolitan area, which includes the districts of Donostialdea and Bajo Bi-dasoa, according to the territorial subdivision of the Autonomous Region of the Basque Country. As well as Donostia-San Sebastián, the metropolitan area includes the municipalities of Andoain, Astigarraga, Errenteria, Hernani, Irún, Lasarte-Oria, Lezo, Oiartzun, Pasaia, Urnieta and Ursubil.

This urban area has a surface area of 376 km2 and a population of 399,0682, is made up of the towns of Donostia-San Sebastián, Pasaia, Errenteria and Lezo, and clearly leads the metropolitan area and region of Gipuzkoa.

The road network around the Donostia-San Sebastián area concentrates nation-al and international arterial roads. Donostia-San Sebastián is situated in the cross-roads of two traditional arterial roads:

The N-I, which comes from Tolosa, to the south, and ends in Behobia, to the west, on the French border.

The N-634, which starts in the area of Lasarte-Usurbil and is the main ar-tery that leads to the entire Cantabrian coast.

These arteries are currently motorways; the N-I is a toll-free motorway from To-losa to Donostia-San Sebastián, and the coastal road (N-I east and N634) has fea-tures of a toll motorway (A8 Bilbao-Behobia artery).

2Eustat: Municipal Population Statistics, 28/05/2012


It is worth mentioning that Donostia-San Sebastián is connected with Pamplona by a motorway, after Andoain.

The main arterial roads cross the city from east to west on the A8 relief road, a toll-free road between the new N-I intersection and the Pasaia junction and the city's Second Belt, which was recently opened.

People mainly travel between the city and the surrounding area in the province on the following roads:

A8, west, from Zarautz

A1 south, from Tolosa

Urumea Motorway

A1 east from Pasaia and Errenteria

A8, east, from Irún

Aritzeta-Enlace-Urumea section (Second Belt in Donostia-San Sebas-tián), which connects with the Urumea Motorway and with the N-1, and runs between the towns of Errenteria, Oiartzun, Astigarraga, Donostia-San Sebastián, Hernani, Lasarte-Oria and Usurbil.

If we focus on travelling in the surrounding area in the province and taking the data from the “Study of Mobility in the Basque Country 2011 3 as reference, in Gipuzkoa a total of 1,976,745 internal trips take place every day, 33.6% of the total of intraprovincial trips in the Basque Country.

Regarding the reasons for these trips, 36.3% are commuting trips, followed by leisure (23.9%), studies (12.3%) and personal and family affairs (11.8%).

As for the mode of transport, if we compare motorised and non-motorised modes (walking or cycling), the results are quite similar, although the first type is slightly higher (52.4% and 47.6% respectively). The most used motorised mode of transport is the car, with a difference (71%), followed by bus (19%), train (4.6%) and motor-bike (4%).

Taking into account the global data for travel in the province of Gipuzkoa and its districts, it is essential to analyse travel in its capital, Donostia-San Sebastián, be-cause it is a hub for work, studies and leisure.

145,428 trips take place every day into Donostia-San Sebastián from outside. 85.7% of these (124.595) come from the province, especially from the metropolitan area (63.6%). Regarding this travel into the capital, motorised modes of transport are used the most (94%). Out of these, individual vehicles such as cars or motor-bikes are the most popular (74%), compared to collective transport such as the bus or train (36%). Regarding travel out of the capital (146,301 trips), the behaviour is practically the same.

3Department of Housing, Public Works and Transport of the Basque Country, 2011.


On the other hand, if we consider internal travel inside the city, non-motorised modes (mostly walking, although people also cycle) are the most popular (52.5%), compared to motorised vehicles (46.5%), because of the city layout – it is a small city, largely pedestrian and well connected with cycle paths and other vertical transport systems (lifts, escalators, etc.).

This proportion of usage of sustainable methods in internal travel in the city is largely thanks to the sustainable mobility policies that the city has been developing since the 1990s. Some of the actions carried out include:

a deep transformation of the concept of urban traffic and the functionality of the road network, which led to important changes in the organisation of traffic, the elimination of through traffic and limitation of approach roads,

a coordinated policy with pedestrian streets, mainly in the urban expan-sion area,

a parking policy that combined the control of on-street parking (OTA) with new car parks for residents and visitors,

strong promotion of cycling,

improvement and optimisation of the local bus network,

promotion of walking between neighbourhoods by eliminating barriers and introducing vertical modes of transport (lifts),

the drafting of the Donostia-San Sebastián Urban Sustainable Mobility Plan (2008-2024) is seen as a "framework" for short-, medium- and long-term objectives and planning,

awareness-raising actions such as Individualised Plans in the neighbour-hoods of Amara and Antiguo.

A lot of people, however, still use their private cars for commuting. As it has been observed in past analyses, commuting is the main reasons for travelling in pri-vate cars, so it is interesting to analyse in depth the features of commuting in the capital.

If we focus on the main work hubs in Donostia-San Sebastián, we find five large industrial estates and/or business parks, situated in the city belt: Igara, Zuatzu, Pol-ígono 27, Miramón and Belartza. These areas of economic activity gather most of the employment, not only for residents in the Donostia-San Sebastián municipality but also for other towns in the province. It is calculated that these estates currently employ more than 14,000 people, which means that it is an important hub for gen-erating mobility.

Out of these work centres, the most important one in terms of the number of workers is the San Sebastián Technology Park - Miramón, where more than 3.200 workers come every day. With the aim of improving mobility in this part of the city the study will focus on this area.


Situated in the Miramón-Zorroaga neighbourhood, at the top of Monte Miramón, in the south of the city, the San Sebastián Technology Park, also known as Miramón, is situated close to the French border and is well connected:

4 airports within a radius of less than 100 km (Hondarribia, Bilbao, Pam-plona and Biarritz).

A commercial-fishing port (Pasajes) less than 10 km away.

Bilbao port (commercial) 100 km away.

Motorways (junctions to the N-1, A-8).

The French high-speed train (TGV) 20 km away.

The Park current has a surface area of approximately 540,000 m2, divided into 36 plots and 29 buildings occupied by 76 companies and technology centres, em-ploying more than 3,200 people, without including the students who go there for their doctoral theses or to attend engineering courses, people who go for confer-ences, etc. The Science Museum and the Polyclinic health centre are also situated there, and many people visit them every day.

Because of its uneven terrain, as it is situated at the top of Monte Miramón, it is usually complicated to get into the Park, which means not many bus lines come right inside, as we will see further along in the section on the description of the transport systems that get to the Technology Park.

Figure 3: San Sebastian Technology Park


Regarding the roads that lead to the Technology Park, we find:

The N-1 (Irún-France), with two junctions that lead to the Park. Both junc-tions converge in a traffic circle or a crossroads, which can cause traffic jams because drivers may find it hard to join or get to the city traffic as there is a large amount of vehicles during rush hours. .

Another way of getting there is to drive into the city of Donostia-San Se-bastián through the neighbourhood of Amara, and drive up Anoeta past the Hospitales area, where there are large traffic jams as there is only one lane for vehicles. From Hospitales you get to the Park through the Poly-clinic roundabout.

Another important road is the one that runs through the area of the Urumea plain, which connects the centre of Donostia-San Sebastián with Loiola, Martutene and Hernani, on the GI-131, onto the GI-2132, leading to Paseo Oriamendi and from there you get to the Park through the Tec-nalia roundabout.

The last way to get there is on the A-8, taking the junction to Paseo de Oriamendi, to the Tecnalia roundabout. This way of getting there is also used by people coming from the centre of Donostia-San Sebastián, who drive to the Park through Aiete or Bera.

Thanks to the last Transport Plan to Improve Mobility to San Sebastián Technol-ogy Park, for which an electronic survey was carried out amongst the workers, the specific mobility of the Park was analysed in depth and characterised, with the fol-lowing results:

Origin of the workers: Most of the people coming to work every day to the technology Park are from the municipality of Donostia-San Sebastián (54% of those polled), specifically from the neighbourhoods of Amara, Gros, Antiguo and Aiete. Regarding workers who come from outside the city, most of them come from the border (Irún, Hendaia and Hondarribia), Errenteria, Hernani, Andoain, Lasarte-Oria, Tolosa and Zarautz.


Figure 4: Origin of the commute

Morning and evening rush hours: Most people get to work between 7 and 9

am, the busiest time being 8-9 am. However, as for the evening rush hour, there is no main time frame, although it can be noted that most people leave between 5 and 7 pm, although 10% of the workers leave between 4 and 5 pm, and an-other 10% leave after 7 pm. And most of them stay in the Park for lunch.

Figure 5: Entry and exit times

Modes of transport: Regarding the modes of transport people use, 78% of the

workers come to the Park in their private vehicles, mostly carrying one person (only 20% share a car). Nearly 13% use public transport (bus), followed by those who use motorbikes (5%) and finally, those who combine various modes of pub-lic transport, i.e. bus and train (3%).

This means that on average, including workers and visitors, around 2,100 vehi-cles enter the Park every day.


20% Car Shared 80% Car No Shared

Figure 6: Modes of transport

If we analyse the modes of transport according to the origin, there are more workers in the Park who live in Donostia-San Sebastián than those using public transport to come to work, though this ratio is still quite low (21%). The reason for this is that the intercity bus network with direct connection to the Park is in-sufficient, so people have to use their own vehicle to get to work. Combined transport (bus+train) is logically used more by those living outside Donostia-San Sebastián, but it is not widely used either.

Reasons for using each mode of transport: There are two main reasons giv-en by the workers in the Park for using their private vehicles: the time they take to get there and the lack of direct transport to the same. Another reason that they also mentioned was that the public transport stops are far from most of the buildings in the Park. As we already mentioned before, because of the terrain and the fact that the buildings are scattered, public transport by road does not enter the Park.

We must highlight that the main reason for using public transport is that those workers do not have their own car (that is, they have no choice), and if they did have a choice, 63% of the users admit they would use their own private vehicles, mainly because of the time it takes, and the fact that a private vehicle is more convenient than public transport. Another reason for using public transport is that it is more economical.


Figure 7: Reasons for using cars and public transport

Finally, it is important to note that 76% of the employees who use their private

vehicles would be prepared to use public transport if it improved and it if was com-petitive compared to private transport.

2.2 Description of the Local Transport System

This section describes the public transport system of the city of Donostia-San Sebastián and then analyses in depth the public transport services that gets to the San Sebastián Technology Park, which is the object of this study.

The public transport system of the city of Donostia-San Sebastián is mainly structured around two modes of transport: bus (city and intercity) and train, as well as taxi and a public bike hire service.

City bus service:

The Donostia-San Sebastián City Council provides regular public transport with the Compañía del Tranvía de San Sebastián (Dbus) for general use of travellers in the city, generally known as city transport.

This city bus service has 41 lines, including regular, special and night services.

These lines cover the entire city and connect the different neighbourhoods, as shown in the map below:

Con formato: Fuente:(Predeterminado)LucidaSansUnicode, 10 pto,Negrita


Figure 8: Map of city transport in Donostia-San Sebastián (Dbus)


Intercity bus service

Lurraldebus is the company that provides the intercity bus service in the prov-ince of Gipuzkoa, and is made up of different transport operators. Thanks to this service, the city is connected with Vitoria and Bilbao, as well as with the main mu-nicipalities in the province, such as Hernani, Usurbil, Lasarte, Tolosa, Azkoitia, Andoain, Urnieta, Oiartzun, Errenteria, Pasaia, Hondarribia, Irún, Zarautz, Orio, Zumaia, Vitoria, Eibar, Arrasate, Amorebieta Durango, Lekeitio, Bilbao, Bergara, etc.

Rail transport:

Rail transport in the city of Donostia-San Sebastián is provided by two rail opera-tors: EuskoTren and Renfe Cercanías:

RENFE Cercanías

This suburban train service, provided by the public company Renfe-Cercanías, connects the city of Donostia-San Sebastián, with line C-1 -Irún-Brinkola (a service that runs on the Madrid-Irún-Hendaia line) with the districts of Alto Deba, Tolo-saldea, Goierrialdea, Donostialdea, Oarsoaldea and Bidasoa. Specifically, this line connects the capital with the municipalities of Oñati, Tolosa, Villabona, Zumárraga and Lasarte-Oria, Andoain, Urnieta, Hernani, Pasaia, Errenteria, and Irún, amongst others.

Figure 9: Map of line C1 by Renfe Donostia-San Sebastián


The C1 line trains provide semi-direct services and services that stop at all the stations. The average speed is 41 kph and although there is not a specific frequen-cy, we can say that at rush hour they run every 13 minutes, and during the rest of the day they go by every 30 or 60 minutes. On working days in winter the number of trains goes up to 43 in each direction, while on an average working day in summer it can go down to 37.

The Cercanías line offers good coverage for the population and the economic activities in the east corridor, but worse in the south, especially after Hernani.

EuskoTren

Commonly known as "Topo" ("Mole"), the Euskotren service in Gipuzkoa has two lines:

Line 2: Lasarte-Oria – Hendaia: Running every 15 to 30 minutes (accord-ing to the time of day), it has several stops in Donostia-San Sebastián, in the neighbourhoods of Amara and Loiola.

Line 1K: Zumaia – Donostia-San Sebastián: It runs approximately every 30 minutes and also has several stops in Donostia-San Sebastián, in the neighbourhoods of Amara, Loiola and Intxaurrondo.

These lines connect the districts of Bidasoa, Tolosaldea, Urola Kosta, Oarsoaldea and Bajo Deba, and Donostialdea with Donostia-San Sebastián. The first one is 29.42 km long and the second one is 21.20 km long, and they overlap in the Lasarte-Donostia-San Sebastián section.

The speed of this service is 32 kph on average, except for the fast service, with fewer stops, which reaches 51 kph.

EuskoTren provides a high number of daily services. The service runs up to 67 times on working days in the Errenteria – Amara section. The Kostaldea service, however, runs 30 times on working days.


Figure 10: Map of EuskoTren Donostia-San Sebastián

Bike hire system

The city of Donostia-San Sebastián has 36 km of cycle paths ("bidegorri") which are to be extended in the next months, as a new 1.2-km section is being built in the Pasaia area. This path will connect the neighbourhoods of Herrera and Buenavista, which completes the main cyclist-pedestrian path between Errenteria, Pasai Antxo and Donostia-San Sebastián.

Over the past few years the Donostia-San Sebastián City Council has been de-veloping a policy to promote the use of bikes, which not only includes cycle paths, but also complementary measures, including the creation of a Bicycle Observatory, a system to register bikes, etc.

The latest measure, which was put into place in 2008, was to introduce a public bike hire service in the city: Dbizi. This service is made up of 9 stations with 195 docking stations for a total of 150 bikes, and the service is available from 7.30 am to 9 pm.

To use this system you need an accreditation card, which is swiped on a reader at the station, which collects the user's data and releases a bike. By using this elec-tronic card, the user can take a bike from any of the docking stations and return it to any free station, in a flexible and simple way. It is important to point out that both RENFE and EuskoTren allow you to take the bikes on the trains, which facilitates travel between the different towns.


Figure 11: Map of the cycle paths in Donostia-San Sebastián

The lift system

In recent years a dozen public lifts have been opened, in order to overcome the difference in altitude in the city and help older people to get around more easily.

As well as these lifts, the Works and Projects Department of the Donostia-San Sebastián City Council has also developed a project, currently under way, for an-other type of vertical mobility infrastructure, such as escalators or ramps.


Figure 12: Vertical transport systems in Donostia-San Sebastián


If we focus now on the Miramón Technology Park, we find that there are two modes of public transport to get to the Park directly: the city bus and the intercity bus.

Public transport by city bus (Dbus)

There are three city bus lines that connect the Technology Park directly with the city centre:

Line 28: Amara – Hospitales. It provides a service that connects the neighbourhoods of Amara, Centro and Miramón-Zorroaga with the Tech-nology Park, with four stops in the Park (one in the Polyclinic area, anoth-er in the Juntas Generales (representative assemblies) area, the third in the car park at the Park entrance, and the fourth in Paseo de Miramón, in front of Sanitas) out of 28 stops on the line. The map below shows the route of line 28, with the neighbourhoods of Donostia-San Sebastián which are connected with Miramón.

Figure 13: Map of Line 28

The service runs working days between 6.37 or 7 am and 11.13 pm or 12 am

(departing from the Boulevard and from Hospital Donostia II respectively), running every 6 minutes approximately. On Saturdays it runs every 7-9 minutes, although after 8 am the services to Miramón run every hour, approximately, and the same in the opposite direction. It takes about 25 minutes to get from the Boulevard stop to the Miramón area.


Line 31: Intxaurrondo-Ospitaleak-Altza. This line connects the neigh-bourhoods of Gros, Centro, Egia, Intxaurrondo, Loyola, Amara Aiete and Miramón-Zorroaga with the Technology Park. This service has five stops in the Park (the same stops as line 28, plus a stop at Ibermática, at the beginning of PaseoMikeletegi) out of a total of 35 stops on the line.

The map below shows the route of line 31, with the neighbourhoods of Donostia-San Sebastián which are connected with Miramón.


The service runs on working days from 7.10 am to 9.40 or 10.30 pm, every half

hour. On Saturdays the service starts at 7.40 am and finishes at 10.30 pm, every 30 minutes. Lastly, on public holidays the service starts at 9.40 am and finishes at 10.30 pm, but on those days it runs every 60 minutes. Travel time on this line is ap-proximately 2 hours.

Line 35: Antiguo – Aiete – Hospitales. It connects the neighbourhoods of Antiguo, Aiete and Miramón-Zorroaga with the Technology Park, and has 5 stops in the Park out of a total of 54 stops on the line.



The service runs on working days, starting at 7.30 am and finishing at 9.30 or

10.05 pm (departing from Arriola and Hospital I respectively). On Saturdays, the first bus starts at 8.30 or 9.05 am, until 9.30 or 10.05 pm (departing from Arriola and Hospital I respectively) and runs every 60 minutes. Finally, on public holidays the first bus from Arriola departs at 10.30 am and the one from Hospital I departs at 11.05 am. The last bus departs at 9.30 pm from Arriola and at 10.05 pm from Hospi-tal I. It also runs every 60 minutes. Travel time on this line is approximately 50 minutes.

After studying these lines which go directly to the Miramón Technology Park, we conclude that the following neighbourhoods in Donostia-San Sebastián are directly connected with the Park by bus: El Antiguo, Gros, Aiete, Amara, Centro and Miramón-Zorroaga. That is, 6 neighbourhoods out of 22 that make up the municipal-ity of Donostia-San Sebastián – i.e. 27%.

If we extrapolate the proportion obtained from the survey regarding the origin of workers from Donostia-San Sebastián from the number of workers in the Park, we obtain the number of workers in each neighbourhood and that way we can know the public transport coverage for the total of workers in the businesses of the Park. Ac-


cording to the neighbourhoods covered by the direct service to the Technology Park, we can say that it reaches 63% of the workers in the Park, that is, 2,000 em-ployees approximately.

Public transport by intercity bus

Regarding the intercity transport service, there are two companies running lines directly to the Park: Autobuses Garayar and Compañía del Tranvía de San Sebas-tián Tolosa (TSST) - LurraldeBus:

Autobuses Garayar: Line G1: Hernani–Aiete-Donostia-San Sebas-tián.It provides a service with one stop in the Park (before the entrance through the roundabout at the beginning of Paseo Mikeletegi) out of 21 stops on the line. On working days (Monday-Saturday) the first bus from Hernani to Donostia-San Sebastián departs at 6.30 am and the last bus departs at 10 pm. In the opposite direction, the first bus departs at 7 am and the last one at 10.30 pm. In both directions it runs every 15 minutes.

On public holidays, the departure from Hernani is at 7.45 am, the follow-ing bus is at 2.15 pm, and the service finishes at 10 pm. Between 2.15 and 10 pm, buses run every 15 minutes. In the opposite direction, the first bus departs at 8.15 am and runs every 30 minutes until 2.45 pm, when the frequency goes down to every 15 minutes, until 10.30 pm. It takes 10 minutes approximately from Hernani, the first stop, to Miramón.

Autobuses Garayar: Line G3: Andoain – Ciudad Sanitaria (stop at Poliklinika) (passing though Urnieta). It provides a service with one stop in the Park (on the Poliklinika roundabout) out of 23 stops on the line. On working days (Monday-Saturday) the first bus from Andoain departs at 7.10 am and 9 am, and the last bus departs at 9.10 pm. In the opposite direction, the first bus departs at 8.15 am and the last one at 10.15 pm. It runs every hour approximately in both directions. There are no buses on Sundays or public holidays.

Compañía del Tranvía de San Sebastián – Tolosa (TSST): T2: Lasarte – Oria –Hospitales. It provides a service with one stop in the Park (on the Poliklinika roundabout). On working days the first bus departs from Lasarte at 7.30 am and the last one at 8 pm. In the opposite direction, the first bus departs at 7.45 am and the last one at 8.15 pm. It runs every hour approximately in both directions.

The following imageshows a map with the locations of the different public transport stops in the Park:


Figure 16: Locations of the public transport stops in Miramón

As we can see from the map above, all the bus stops are at the entrance to the Park and situated quite far from most of the businesses in the Park. This means that public transport to the Park is not very attractive, especially taking into account the terrain and the bad weather.

Combined transport

As well as the previous ways of getting to the Park, there are other ways if you combine various modes of transport: Interurban Bus + City Bus, Renfe + City Bus or EuskoTren + City Bus.

The next table shows all the possible combinations to get to the Park:


Table 1: Combined Transport to the Park

Operator Line Origin Frequency (work-ing days)

Change of transport

INTERCITY BUS + CITY BUS (DBus)

Transportes PE-SA

P37 Arrasate

30 minutes during rush hours (6.15 to 8.30 am) and 1 hour the rest of the day

Line 28 (Dbus), Sancho el Sabio

stop

La Guipuzcoana GI. 2 Azpeitia

30 minutes during rush hours (6.35 to 9.45 am) and 1 hour the rest of the day

Transportes PE-SA

P43 Eibar

30 minutes during rush hours (7 to 9.30 am) and 1 hour the rest of the day

Ekialdebus E21, E23, E24

and E28 Hondarribia and

Irún 1 hour

Compañía del Tranvía de San Sebastián – Tolo-sa (TSST)

T5 Tolosa 30 minutes approx.

EuskoTren EU51 Zumaia and

Zarautz 1 hour approx.

Ekialdebus E2 Oiartzun 30 minutes approx. Line 28 (Dbus), Boulevard stop

RENFE + CITY BUS (DBus)

Renfe Renfe Norte

(C1) Beasain and Zumárraga

It varies (20, 30 or 40 min approx) de-pending on the time of day

Line 28 (Dbus), Urbieta stop

EUSKOTREN + CITY BUS (DBus)

EuskoTren Donostialdea

Metro Pasaia and Er-

renteria 15 minutes approx.

Line 28 (Dbus), Anoeta stop

After this exhaustive analysis, we can conclude that the mode of public transport to get to the Park is the city bus (Dbus), and more specifically, line 28, both for those coming from the city and for those coming from outside, as they have to use it from the EuskoTren and Renfe stations or from the intercity bus stops to get to the Park.


Figure 17: Integrated map of the public transport system in Miramón


3. Problems, Objectives and expected impacts

3.1 Problems

Thanks to the previous analysis, we can make a diagnosis to detect the main mobility problems in the most important business hub in the city, San Sebastián Technology Park.

Most of the people who come to work in the Technology Park every day think that the main problems are the insufficient public transport services available and the lack of areas for parking. Another important problem that they mention is the long distance from the bus stops to their workplaces, as the next figure shows:

Figure 18: Main mobility problems in the Park

The fact that the public transport available is not more attractive than using pri-

vate vehicles means that most of the workers in the Park use their own cars (78%), and the percentage of people sharing cars is very low (20%), which leads to a large amount of traffic every day. 8 out of 10 trips are made in a private motorised vehicle.

Furthermore, the large number of vehicles that come to Miramón every day cause congestion inside the Park, and many people park irregularly, especially on


days when there is a special event. There are also problems to access the Park from the hospital area.

Most workers come from the city of Donostia-San Sebastián (64%), specifically from the neighbourhoods of Amara, Antiguo, Gros, Aiete, Centro, which are well connected with Miramón as there are direct city buses. However, this mode of transport is hardly ever used because of the lack of bus stops inside the Park, which makes it unattractive, especially because of the bad weather and the uneven ter-rain.

Regarding workers coming from outside the city, some of them have direct pub-lic transport services to the Park, but yet again, they do not use them much because the stops are far away.

In both cases, both for normal city travel and from outside the city, people see the fact that they have to walk from the stops to their workplace as an obstacle for using collective transport.

On the other hand, non-motorised accessibility is conditioned by the high loca-tion of Miramón, which means that it is necessary to offer an internal public transport service that connects both parts of the Park.

Figure 19: Two main problematic areas in Miramon technology Park


Furthermore, 76% of private vehicle users would be prepared to use public transport if it were to improve. The solutions to the Park's mobility problems, there-fore, include bringing the bus stops closer to the work centres and improving acces-sibility inside the Park amongst the different areas. All this could be achieved with the introduction of a new public transport system, which is the object of this study. Lastly, if mobility were to improve in this way, it would help to reduce the congestion in the entrances to the Park through the hospital area during rush hours.

3.2 Objectives

The objectives of the new transport system in solving the Park of Mobility of San Sebastian problems are following:

1. Improve current mobility within the Park, promoting sustainable mobility when travelling to work in the Park by encouraging the reduction of travels by car.

2. Change the existing patterns of mobility —to reduce the amount of car travel-lers— by making public transport more efficent and competitive and increasing the advantages gained by using it.

3. To heighten the awareness of mobility to both the workers who use the system and to those agents who are responsible for the system, so that they see the wide aspects available from a better and sustainable mobility, in particular: sci-ence park management, the public administrations, Park workers, companies located in the Park and public transport operators.

4. Reduce the negative impacts of mobility through less CO2 emissions into the atmosphere and accidents and help save energy by encouraging the use of environmentally sustainable transport systems, improving, both financial and social effects (cost savings for staff and companies).

3.3 Impacts expected

The following table sets out the expected impacts and indicators to be taken into account for the implementation of the new transport system. These impacts are re-lated to: transport system, economic efficiency, and environmental impacts.


Table 2: Impacts expected

Evalua-

tion cate-gory

Impacts Indicators Description of

indicator Unit of

measure

Measurement method

Ex-ante Ex-post

Acceptance

User acceptance

Reliability Workers of

Miramon rely on the new service

% Stated preference

survey

User satisfaction for the on demand service

Workers of Miramon who pre-

fer on demand service instead a

frequency

% Stated preference

survey

** Integration with other sys-

tems

Users of the ARTS from other

systems %

Stated preference survey

Willingness to pay

** User willingness

Workers of Miramon willing to pay for an extra fare to use the

new service

% Stated preference

survey

Authorities willingness Authorities willing to pay for the new

% Direct interview with authorities


Evalua-tion cate-

gory Impacts Indicators

Description of indicator

Unit of measure

Measurement method

Ex-ante Ex-post

service

Quality of service

Information

Availability

Level of available

information of the

service

1-5 (*)

Comprehensibility

Level of compre-

hensive infor-

mation of the ser-

vice

1-5 (*)

Ticketing User satisfaction Level of user sat-

isfaction

1-5 (*)

Cleanliness Perceived cleanliness Level of cleaning 1-5 (*)

Comfort

** Perceived comfort

Workers perceive

comfort with the

new service

% Stated preference

survey


Evalua-tion cate-



Unit of measure

Measurement method

Ex-ante Ex-post

Transport patterns

Modal change

Induced mode changes in the other segments of the jour-

ney

% of trips made by other modes com-plementary to the

system

% Demand model-

ling tools

** System modal share % of trips made by

the new system %

Demand model-ling tools

System use

** Total passengerkm trav-elled

Average total pas-sengerkm trav-

elled per day p.km/day Modelling tools

** Total N° of trips

Average total number of pas-senger trips per

day

trips/day Modelling tools

** Vehicle occupancy Mean number of

people per vehicle passengers

/vehicle Modelling tools

System performanc-es

** Average Waiting time Mean waiting time

at the stops for vehicle to arrive

min Modelling tools

** Effective system capacity Maximum possible

number of pas-sengers

passen-gers/day Modelling tools


Evalua-tion cate-



Unit of measure

Measurement method

Ex-ante Ex-post

Social Im-pacts

Spatial Accessibility ** Change in range of key activities accessible within

time thresholds

people accessing to a key activity in

a given time threshold

% Modelling tools

Environ-ment

Energy

** Daily consumption Average daily ve-hicle consumption

of energy kWh Modelling tools

** Energy efficiency

Energy used for passengerkm

kWh/pkm

Calculated from daily consumption and total passen-gerkm travelled

Climate change CO2 Carbon-

dioxideemissions per km

g/km Calculated from

daily consumption

Land take Loss of green space from

construction

Change in green space resulting directly from the

construction of the system

km2 Derived from the

final plans for sys-tem construction

Land take

** Change in road space availability to other users

Change in green space resulting directly from the

construction of the system

km2

Derived from the final plans for sys-tem construction

Total land use change Change in green space within the

city km2

Derived from the final plans for sys-tem construction


Evalua-tion cate-



Unit of measure

Measurement method

Ex-ante Ex-post

Financial

impacts

Start up costs **Track construction and civil

works

Investment for

track and civil

works

€ From design and

experts' opinions

Start up costs

**Vehicle acquisi-

tion/construction

Investment for the

vehicle €

Provided directly

by WP15

**Control systems and appa-

ratus

Investment for the

control systems €

Provided directly

by WP15

Operating costs

**Personnel Yearly cost of the

personnel €/year

From design and

experts' opinions

**Vehicle maintenance Vehicle yearly

costs €/year

Provided directly

by WP15

**Track and civil infrastruc-

tures maintenance Track yearly costs €/year

From design and

experts' opinions

**Control system mainte-

nance

Control system

yearly costs €/year

Provided directly

by WP15

Revenues **Operating revenues Total yearly sys-

tem revenues €/year

From design and

experts' opinions


Evalua-tion cate-



Unit of measure

Measurement method

Ex-ante Ex-post

Economic impacts

Temporary job pro-vided by installation and demonstration

** Jobs provided at the demonstration site

People working in the demonstration

Person·years From the demon-stration proposal

Efficiency

** Financial Net Present Val-ue

Final result of Fi-nancial Cost-

Benefit Analysis Index

Calculated from financial impacts

** Socio-economic Net Pre-sent Value

Final result of So-cio-economic

Cost-Benefit Anal-ysis

Index Calculated from financial impacts

** Internal Rate of Return Alternative ap-

proach to the Net Present Value


**Benefit/Cost Ratio Alternative ap-



(*) 1: Very low/5: Very high


4. Potential site 1 description

The potential site 1,Miramon Paseo Mikeletegi, covers the west area of the Park. In this area there are several buildings with 66 technology-based companies, including the Park management itself. Moreover, in this area of the Park is located the Museum of Science, the Basque Culinary Center Foundation and the Restau-rant Miramon-Arbelaitz.

This area is shown in the next figure:

Figure 20: Area of potential site 1

Comentario [MLJ1]: Cambiar figura


4.1 Demand estimation

As an important fact should be noted that the Park has more than 3,500 employ-ees, to whom we must add visitors coming daily for labor causes. In this site the number of workers are more than 1,200.

Despite that mobility in Miramon Technology Park is mainly labor mobility, there is in this area of the Park the Science Museum and the Basque Culinary Center Foundation, which attracts many people per day during lunchtime, besides of regu-lar events organized by the Park and the visits to companies located there.

They are characterized by the use of private transport (car) or walking through the Park, since currently there is no public transport within the Park and city buses only reach the limits of it, leaving no services to the majority of companies, to the Museum of Science and the Polyclinic.

Mainly, the greater mobility is early in the morning (08:00h-09:00h) and in the af-ternoon (18:00h-19:00h), since employees usually don’t go home at mealtime. As for the mode of transport, three urban and three suburban public transport lines serve this Technology Park, although none of them gets into the Park, so the car is by far the predominant mode of transport.

Actually, the current system transport modes in this site are the following:

Bus lines 28, 31 and 35 of local transport. Bus stops are located far from the most of the companies (In stop 271 of the image).

Bus line G1 of regional transport. Bus stops are located far from the most of the companies.

Private vehicle.

The scenario for the new transport system in this site is to connect with the cur-rent public transport (Lines 28, 31, 35 and G1).

The first estimation of the demand describes the catchment area of each stop (7) in terms of existing generators/attractors of trips:

Stop 531 is near to “Science museum” and “Main Building”: meaning 10% of trips.

Stops 520, 523 and 530 are for different companies meaning 85 % of trips.

Stop 425has low demand: 5% of trips.

Stop 271 is the entrance to this site meaning 100% of trips.


Table 3: Demand estimation - Passengers on the ARTS per day (site 1)

Passengers on the ARTS per day (**) Average length

of trip on board the ARTS (m) Attractors Generators Total

Site 1 1.620 162 1.782 600

TOTAL (Sites 1, 2 and 3) 3118 256 3374 817*

(*) Average length of the three sites (**) Workers, clients and visitors

For more details concerning “purpose” for each “origin-destination” see the fol-

lowing table (this information concerns to all sites: 1,2 and 3):

Table 4: Demand estimation - Purpose

ORIGIN (O) DESTINATION (D) LOCATION PURPOSE (*)

Amara District Miramon Technology Park

Inside the city Work

Antiguo District Miramon Technology Park


Aiete District Miramon Technology Park


Gros District Miramon Technology Park


Irún Miramon Technology Park

Outside the city Work

Hendaya Miramon Technology Park


Hondarribia Miramon Technology Park


Errentería Miramon Technology Park


Hernani Miramon Technology Park


Andoain Miramon Technology Park


Lasarte Miramon Technology Park


Tolosa Miramon Technology Park


Zarautz Miramon Technology Park


(*) Added to those above are also the leisure trips for visitors.


For more details concerning “current transport mode” for each “origin-destination” see the following table (this information concerns to all sites: 1, 2 and 3):

Table 5: Demand estimation - Current transport mode

ORIGIN (O)

DESTINATION (D)

LOCATION PURPOSE CURRENT TRANSPORT MODE (*)

Amara Dis-trict

Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Inside the city Work Bus Local Transport (Line 28)and walking: 40% Private vehicle: 60%

Antiguo Dis-trict

Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Inside the city Work Bus Local Transport (Lines 31 and 35)and walking: 10% Private vehicle: 90%

AieteDistrict Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Inside the city Work Bus Local Transport (Lines 31 and 35)and walking: 10% Private vehicle: 90%

Gros District Miramon Technol-ogy Park


Local transport (It is necessary to combine two bus lines -17and 28, 24 and 31 or 35 and as the last option 27 and 31 or 35)and walking: 15% Private vehicle: 85%

Irún Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Outside the city

Work

Combination of the Euskotren service (Líne 2) to AnoetaSta-tion with line 28 of the urban bus service or combination of the Renfe-local train service (Line C1) to Atocha Station and Line 28 of urban bus service and walking: 4%. Private vehicle: 96%

Hendaya Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Outside the city

Work

Combination regional train of Euskotren (Line 2) to Anoeta Station with bus line 28 of local transport or combination re-gional train of Renfe (Line C1) to Atocha Station with go walk-ing to stop of Line 28 of local transport and walking: 13%. Private vehicle: 87%

Hondarribia Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Outside the city

Work

Combination of bus lines E21, E23, E24 or E28 of Ekialdebus (bus regional transport) with Line 28 of bus local transport and walking: 0,08%. Private vehicle: 92%

Errentería Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Outside the city

Work

Combination of regional train Euskotren to Anoeta Station with the bus line 28 of local transport and walking: 18%. Private vehicle: 82%


ORIGIN (O)

DESTINATION (D)

LOCATION PURPOSE CURRENT TRANSPORT MODE (*)

Hernani Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Outside the city

Work

Regional Bus Line G1 (Hernani - Aiete - Donostia) of Autobuses Garayar and walking: 13%.

Private vehicle: 87%

Andoain Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Outside the city

Work

Regional Bus Line G3 (Andoain - Ciudad Sanitaria) of Autobus-es Garayar and walking: 14%. Private vehicle: 86%

Lasarte Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Outside the city

Work

Combination of regional train line 2 of Euskotren to Anoeta Station and bus line 28 of local transport and walking: 5% Private vehicle: 95%

Tolosa Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Outside the city

Work

Combination of regional train line C1 of Renfe to Atocha Sta-tion and Bus Line 28 of local transport and walking: 14%.

Privatevehicle: 86%.

Zarautz Miramon Technol-ogy Park

Outside the city

Work

Combination of bus line EU51 of Euskotren (regional transport) with bus line 28 of local transport or combination of re-gional train line 1K of Eusko-tren to Anoeta Station with bus line 28 of local transport and walking: 14%.

Private vehicle: 86%

(*) Percent means the current distribution of transport modes.


For more details concerning “transport mode with ARTS” for each “origin-destination” see the following table (this information concerns to all sites: 1, 2 and 3):

Table 6: Demand estimation - Transport mode with ARTS

ORIGIN (O) DESTINATION

(D) CURRENT TRANSPORT

MODE TRANSPORT MODE

WITH ARTS (*)

Amara dis-trict

Miramon Tech-nology Park

Bus local transport (Line 28) Bus local transport (Line 28): (Líne 28) +ARTS (Sites 1,2 and 3)

Private vehicle Private vehicle+ ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)

Antiguo dis-trict

Miramon Tech-nology Park

Bus local transport (Lines 31 and 35)

Bus local transport (Lines 31 and 35) + ARTS (Sites 1 and 2)

Private vehicle Private vehicle + ARTS (Sites 1 and 3):

Aiete district Miramon Tech-nology Park

Bus local transport (Lines 31 and 35)

Bus local transport (Lines 31 and 35)+ ARTS (Sites 1 and 2)

Private vehicle Private vehicle + ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)

Gros district Miramon Tech-nology Park

Bus local transport (It is nec-essary to combine two lines -17 and 28, 24 and 31 or 35 and as the last option 27 and 31 or 35)

Bus local transport (It is nec-essary to combine two lines -17 and 28, 24 and 31 or 35 and as the last option 27 and 31 or 35) + ARTS (Sites 1, 2 and 3)

Private vehicle Private vehicle+ ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)

Irún Miramon Tech-nology Park

Combination regional train of Euskotren (Line 2) to Anoeta Station with bus line 28 of local transport or combination regional train of Renfe (Line C1) to Atocha Station with Line 28 of local transport

Combination regional train of Euskotren (Line 2) to Anoeta Station with bus line 28 of local transport or combination regional train of Renfe (Line C1) to Atocha Station with Line 28 of local transport+ ARTS (Sites 1, 2 and 3)

Privatevehicle Private vehicle +ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)

Hendaya Miramon Tech-nology Park

Combination regional train of Euskotren (Line 2) to Anoeta Station with bus line 28 of local transport or combination regional train of Renfe (Line C1) to Atocha with Line 28 of local transport.

Combination regional train of Euskotren (Line 2) to Anoeta Station with bus line 28 of local transport or combination regional train of Renfe (Line C1) to Atocha Station with “walking” to stop of Line 28 of local transport+ARTS (Sites 1, 2 and 3)

Privatevehicle Private vehicle + ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)




MODE TRANSPORT MODE

WITH ARTS (*)

Hondarribia Miramon Tech-nology Park

Combination of bus lines E21, E23, E24 or E28 of Ekialdebus (bus regional transport) with Line 28 of bus local transport.

Combination of bus lines E21, E23, E24 or E28 of Ekialdebus (bus regional transport) with Line 28 of bus local transport+ARTS (Sites 2 and 3)

Private vehicle Private vehicle + ARTS (site 1 and 3)

Errentería Miramon Tech-nology Park

Combination of regional train Euskotren to Anoeta Station with the bus line 28 of local transport.

Combination of regional train Euskotren to Anoeta Station with the bus line 28 of local transport. +ARTS (Sites 1, 2 and 3)

Privatevehicle Private vehicle+ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)

Hernani Miramon Tech-nology Park

Regional Bus Line G1 (Hernani - Aiete - Donostia) of Autobuses Garayar.

Regional Bus Line G1 (Hernani - Aiete - Donostia) of Autobuses Garayar:+ARTS (Site 1)

Privatevehicle. Private vehicle+ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)

Andoain Miramon Tech-nology Park

Regional Bus Line G3 (Andoain - Ciudad Sanitaria) of Autobuses Garayar.

Regional Bus Line G3 (Andoain - Ciudad Sanitaria) of Autobuses Garayar +ARTS (Site 1)

Private vehicle Private vehicle +ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)

Lasarte Miramon Tech-nology Park

Combination of regional train line2 of Euskotren to Anoeta Station and bus line 28 of local transport.

Combination of regional train line 2 of Euskotren to Anoeta Station and bus line 28 of local transport+ARTS (Sites 1, 2 and 3)

Private vehicle Private vehicle+ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)

Tolosa Miramon Tech-nology Park

Combination of regionaltrain line C1 of Renfe to Atocha Station and Bus Line 28 of local transport.

Combination of regional train line C1 of Renfe to Atocha Station and Bus Line 28 of local transport (14%) +ARTS (Sites 1, 2 and 3)

Private vehicle Private vehicle +ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)




MODE TRANSPORT MODE

WITH ARTS (*)

Zarautz Miramon Tech-nology Park

Combination of bus line EU51 of Euskotren (regional transport) with bus line 28 of local transport or combination of regional train line 1K of Euskotren to Anoeta Station with bus line 28 of local transport.

Combination of bus line EU51 of Euskotren (regional transport) with bus line 28 of local transport or combination of regional train line 1K of Euskotren to Anoeta Station with bus line 28 of local transport +ARTS (Sites 1, 2 and 3)

Private vehicle Private vehicle+ARTS (Sites 1 and 3)

(*) Including sites involved on.

Remark: It should be considered the same data from the previous table but changing origin and destination, it means, the path to go back.

For more details concerning “modes of transport in competition with the ARTS” for each “origin-destination” see the following table (this information con-cerns to all sites: 1, 2 and 3):

Table 7: Demand estimation - Modes of transport in competition with the ARTS

ORIGIN (O) DESTINATION (D) MODES OF TRANSPORT IN COM-

PETITION WITH THE ARTS (*)

Amara District Miramon Technology Park Bus Local transport Line 28 (Site 3) Private vehicle (Sites 1,2,3)/ Walking (Sites 1 and 2)

Antiguo District Miramon Technology Park Private vehicle (Sites 1,2,3)

Walking (Sites 1 and 2)

Aiete District Miramon Technology Park Private vehicle (Sites 1,2,3)


Gros District Miramon Technology Park Private vehicle

Walking (Sites 1,2)

Irún Miramon Technology Park

Bus Local transport. Line 28 (Site 3)

Private vehicle (Sites 1,2,3)

Walking (Site 1 and 2)

Hendaya Miramon Technology Park Private vehicle (Sites 1,2,3)

Walking (Site 1 and 2)

Hondarribia Miramon Technology Park Private vehicle (Sites 1,2,3)


Errentería Miramon Technology Park



Walking (Sites 1,2,3)


ORIGIN (O) DESTINATION (D) MODES OF TRANSPORT IN COM-

PETITION WITH THE ARTS (*)

Hernani Miramon Technology Park Private vehicle (Sites 1,2,3)

Walking (Sites 1,2,3)

Andoain Miramon Technology Park Private vehicle (Sites 1,2,3)


Lasarte Miramon Technology Park



Walking(Sites 1 and 2)

Tolosa Miramon Technology Park



Walking(Sites 1 and 2)

Zarautz Miramon Technology Park




(*) Including sites involved on.


4.2 System pre-design

The type of layout of the ARTS in this site is a ring and the track length of the site is 2.100 meters (outward and return). In this site, the ARTS is mixed with vehi-cles and bicycles. Nonetheless, it is possible to cut off traffic from the final part of the route. There is only one crossing point but this could be removed if It´s consid-ered necessary. Actually it´s not regulated. The system pre-design in site 1 is shown in the next figure:

Figure 21: Pre-design of site 1

So, the outcomes related to the “system predesign” for site 1 can be summa-

rized as follows:

Table 8: Demand estimation - Summary from the system predesign

Number of vehicles circulating on the proposed network 3

Average waiting times at the stops (seconds) 72,5

Vehicle commercial speed (Km/h) 20 km/h.

Vehicle mileage (veh·km) 139 veh*Km

Passengers·km travelled for the selected site (pax km) 534,6


4.3 Initial assessment

From the experts’ point of view, this site seems to be very appropriate. They mentioned this area was evaluated before and some different alternatives of transport mode like a frequency shuttle-bus were tested without very positive bal-ance. Besides, nowadays some results from research projects are trying to deploy PRT systems too. So, BRT could be a very good option, mainly taking the demand estimation into account.

On the other hand, experts highlighted this type of solution for this area would not require important modifications.

4.4 Initial practical feasibility analyses

Further feedbacks provided by experts on the system pre-design to complete and confirm the site selection were the followings:

The demand estimation is the most important due to 51% of demand and mobility is concentrated in this area, not only workers but visitors, events, etc., generated by the technology Park activity. Additionally, headquarter of the Miramon Park is in this area where a lot of events are held, and the Science museum, having more than 150.000 yearly visitors, is located too.

Additionally, there are different groups of people, focus on the urban planning, communication system within the Park and public responsible related to urban mobility, who think, from the technical point of view, it would be easy to segregate ARTS from normal traffic in this site. Besides, there is an underground car park ready to be used as well as a charging point and garage during the demonstration where the wireless communi-cations have a very good quality.

From the legal point of view, the technicians of mobility area of San Se-bastian council think that the required modification in local rules would not be very important in order to let ARTS to run during the demonstration. Besides, the Spanish legacy is very permissive if a co-driver is consid-ered, mainly from the safety aspect.

It has to be considered too that workers in this site are more related to/involved on using this type of advanced transport systems, mainly be-cause most of them participate in the mobility committee of the Park and/or support it from the starting.


There are several entities involved on (and supporting) the demonstration, ensuring the success in the performance, it means, regional government, municipality and the technology Park management.



The potential site 2, Miramon Ikusi, covers the east area of the Park, where there are 10 audiovisual, technological and health companies (there is also one of the most important medical centers of the city, the Gipuzkoa Poliklinika).






In this area the mobility is mainly labor mobility, of both employees of companies located in the Park and commercial visitors. Despite this labor mobility, there is in this area a Hospital (Polyclinic) that attracts health mobility.

They are characterized by the use of private transport (car) or walking through the Park, since currently there is no public transport within the Park and city buses only reach the limits of it, leaving no services to the majority of companies and the Polyclinic.


Bus lines 28, 31 and 35 of local transport. Bus stops are located far from the most of the companies (In stop 271 of the image).

Bus line G3, T2, EU53, E03y E07of regional transport. Bus stops are lo-cated far from the most of the companies.

Private vehicle.

The scenario for the new transport system in this site is to connect with the cur-

rent public transport (Lines 28,31,35, G3, T2, EU53, E03 y E07).

The first estimation of the demand describes the catchment area of each stop (6) in terms of existing attractors of trips:

Stops 426 and 427 could be considered as the same one and it is the en-trance to the site (100 % of trips).

Stops 532 and 537 are near to an important company (EITB) meaning 25% of trips.

Stops 534 and 535 are near to a large company (IKUSI) meaning 75% of trips.




Site 2 562 0 562 850

TOTAL (Sites 1, 2 and 3) 3.118 256 3.374 817*


More details related to site 2 concerning “purpose”, “current transport mode”,

“transport mode with ARTS” and “modes of transport in competition with the ARTS” was reported within tables in section 4.1.



The objective of the pre-design step is to select a single site out of the several potential sites that each city might be considering at the beginning of the City study.

The type of layout of the ARTS is a ring and the track length of the site is 2.300 metres (outward and return). In this site, it is possible to cut off all the traffic. Poten-tially, it could be without crossings. It´s not regulated. A new car park area for ARTS should be considered. There is only one crossing point but this could be removed if It´s considered necessary. Actually the traffic it´s not regulated.

The system pre-design in site 2 is shown in next figure:

Figure 23: System pre-design of site 2


So, the outcomes related to the “system predesign” for site 2 can be summa-rized as follows:

Table 10: Demand estimation - Summary from the system predesign (site 2)



Vehicle commercial speed (km/h) 21 km/h.

Vehicle mileage (veh·km) 140 veh.km

Passengers·km travelled for the selected site (Pax km) 215,43


From the experts’ point of view, similarly to site 1, this site is appropriate and doesn’t require additional modifications according to the previously proposed de-sign.

However, the demand estimation seems to be not viable or as appropriate as site 1 (only three companies are located on this area, it means 17 % of workers in the technology Park).


Regarding site 2, further feedbacks provided by experts on the system pre-design to complete the site selection were the followings:

Similarly to every site, there are different groups of people, focus on the urban planning, communications within the Park and public responsible related to urban mobility, who think, from the technical point of view, it would be easy to segregate ARTS from normal traffic in this site.

In any case, the most important problem is the poor infrastructure for parking and wireless communication system. Besides, this area doesn’t receive additional visitors coming from special events, congresses, etc.

From the legal point of view, similarly to every site, the technicians of mo-bility area of San Sebastian council consider that the required modifica-tion in local rules would not be important to run properly the ARTS during the demonstration. Once more, it has to be considered that the Spanish legacy is enough permissive if a co-driver is considered.

It has to be considered too that workers in this site are not very involved on using this type of advanced transport systems, mainly because they don’t participate in the mobility committee of the Park and there is not guarantee ARTS would be so used as by workers in site 1. Besides, there


are previous experiences providing special bus service and it was sus-pended for this area due to the low demand.

As commented for site 1, there are several entities involved in the gov-ernance of the selected site, but more entities would be related to this site, it means, regional government, municipality, the technology Park management, and additional local government and the interurban transport system.

Experts mentioned the following too: The municipality should be warned to close traffic at starting of the demonstration including the possibility to penalize with traffic tickets if illegal parkings would occur.



The potential site 3, Anoeta - Miramonstretches from the suburb of Anoeta, specifically from the Euskotren train stop, located South of the city of San Sebas-tian, connecting the parking totheGipuzkoaPoliclynic.






As in the previous cases, mobility in this loop is mostly labor mobility (moreover in this site It´s located the official building called “Juntas Generales”, which cele-brates meetings often, and despite that the use of private car among the Park work-ers is the most common mode of transport, the area is also served by bus line 28 of the city’s public transport (connecting downtown with Amara, Anoeta district and the Miramon Technology Park) and line 2 of Euskotren (connecting the Anoeta district with major towns in the region). Lesser extent than work journeys, but also im-portant, are the displacements for health reasons to the Polyclinic, which are made using the Euskotren train service to connect with line 28.


Bus line 28 of local transport.

Euskotren (regional train), which connects with the urban area Donostialdea and the most important towns in the province and even with Bilbao.

The scenario for the new transport system in this site is to connect with the cur-rent public transport (Lines 28 y, T2 Euskotren).

The first estimation of the demand describes the catchment area of each stop (3) in terms of existing generators/attractors of trips:

Stop A:is corresponding to the train station meaning 75% of trips.

Stop in the middle is corresponding to a big car park area meaning 25% of trips.

Stop B is corresponding to the entrance to the Park meaning 100% of trips.

In this site new generators/attractors will be potentially created when the demon-stration will be implemented.




Site 3 936 94 1.030 1.000

TOTAL (Sites 1, 2 and 3) 3.118 256 3.374 817*


More details related to site 3 concerning “purpose”, “current transport mode”,

“transport mode with ARTS” and “modes of transport in competition with the ARTS” was reported within tables in section 4.1.



In this site the type of layout of the ARTS is a shuttleline and the track length of the site is 3.050 meters (outward and return). In this site one specific lane would be reserved only for the ARTS. It could be an isolated lane. Nowadays, there is a crossing at the end of the path (at the roundabout) and the traffic it´s not regulated.

There is an existing car park area ready to be used by ARTS.

The system pre-design in site 3 is shown in next figure:

Figure 25: System pre-design of site 3

Comentario [MLJ4]: Falta algo?


So, the outcomes related to the “system predesign” for site 3 can be summa-rized as follows:

Table 12: Demand estimation - Summary from the system predesign (site 3)



Vehicle commercial speed (km/h) 20 km/h.

Vehicle mileage (veh·km) 139,4

Passengers·km travelled for the selected site (pax*Km) 1.047,16


From the experts’ point of view, based on the above proposed design, this site would require additional changes related to the infrastructure and other problems coming from the safety point of view and higher costs which do it not so viable for the final demonstrator.

However, the demand estimation would not be a problem although the extra dis-tance could be.


Regarding site 3, further feedbacks provided by experts on the system pre-design to complete the site selection were the followings:

Similarly to every site, there are different groups of people, focus on the urban planning, communications system within the Park and public re-sponsible related to urban mobility, who warn this site could not be easily segregated from normal traffic and the most important problem would be the required bridge to access to the car park area.

Besides, the path of this site crosses a dangerous road.

It is not clear to be a solution to solve any mobility problem within the Park due to this demonstrator´s stops are in the border of the Park and far from the most of the companies.

From the legal point of view, the technicians of mobility area of San Se-bastian council didn’t guarantee the required modifications in local rules for this area. Anyway, once again it has to be considered that the Spanish legacy is very permissive if a co-driver is considered.

As commented for site 2, there are several entities involved in the gov-ernance of the selected site, but more entities than in site1, it means, re-gional government, municipality, the technology Park management, and additional local government and the interurban transport system.


7. Intra-city site selection

The objective of this chapter is to select a single site out of the three potential sites that San Sebastian city considered at the beginning of the City study.

The site selected is site 1 Miramon-Paseo Mikeletegi. In summary, the main reasons for choosing this site are the foreseen demand and the opinion of experts, since they can assess the impacts of the system on each potential site based on their experience.

In site 2, mainly the demand is lower and other pilots of transport systems (bus service inside the Park) in this area hardly ever was used. There isn´t a parking.

In site 3 there is a crossing at the end of the path (at the roundabout) that it´s not regulated so it´s preferably don’t select this site for the demonstration.

Further reasons could be obtained mainly from the titled “Initial practical feasibil-ity analyses” sections for every site.

Comentario [MLJ5]: Relacio-nado con los parrafos que podrían ir en los “4.3 Initialassesment” y “4.4 Initialpracticalfeasibilityanaly-ses”.

Comentario [MLJ6]: Relacio-nado con los parrafos que podrían ir en los “5.3 Initialassesment” y “5.4 Initialpracticalfeasibilityanaly-ses”

Comentario [MLJ7]: Relacio-nado con los parrafos que podrían ir en los “6.3 Initialassesment” y “6.4 Initialpracticalfeasibilityanaly-ses”


8. Initial evaluation

The plan for the initial evaluation contains the impacts and the indicators, the data collection sources and requirements, and analysis/derivation techniques needed to assess properly the costs, functional characteristics, efficiency, effec-tiveness, and other impacts of the system to be implemented. The evaluation plan will contain a list of relevant measures to consider in order to perform a thorough evaluation of the operational phase of the demonstration.

A reference case (the results from the pilot service of a frequency shuttle bus in the same site) has to be taken into account for each indicator, by referring to the existing conventional transport systems in the city. After this, a threshold for success per indicator has to be defined, to serve as reference value in the ex-ante evaluation. This will allow the city to assess whether the new system has been successful or not.

The next table includes the set of indicators to be measured in the ex-ante evaluation of the system, as well as the results of the reference case and a threshold for success for each indicator.

Comentario [M8]: JESUS AQUÍ TENEMOS QUE INCLUIR LA TABLA DE INDICADORES CON EL UMBRAL ESTABLECIDO EN CADA INDICADOR. DEBE-RÍAMOS INTENTAR COMPLE-TARLO EL LUNES.


Table 13: Impacts expected - Thresholds

Evaluation category

Impacts Indicators Description of indica-

tor

Unit of meas-

ure

Measurement method

Initial Evaluation

Shuttle bus

Threshold

Acceptance

User acceptance

Reliability Workers of Miramon

rely on the new service %

Stated prefer-

ence survey

Users satisfaction for

the on demand service

Workers of Miramon

who prefer on demand

service instead a fre-

quency service

% Stated prefer-

ence survey

** Integration with other

systems

Users of the ARTS

from other systems %

Stated prefer-

ence survey

Willingness to pay

** User willingness

Workers of Miramon

willing to pay for an

extra fare for the new

service

% Stated prefer-

ence survey

Authorities willingness

Public Authorities will-

ing to pay for the new

service

%

Direct inter-

view with au-

thorities


Evaluation category


tor

Unit of meas-

ure

Measurement method

Initial Evaluation

Shuttle bus

Threshold

Quality of

service

Information

Availability

Level of available in-

formation of the ser-

vice

1-5(*) 2 4

Comprehensibility

Level of comprehen-

sive information of the

service

1-5(*)

2 4

Ticketing User satisfaction Level of user satisfac-

tion

1-5(*) 2 4

Cleanliness Perceived cleanliness Level of cleaning 1-5(*) 3 4

Comfort ** Perceived comfort Workers perceive com-

fort with the new ser-

% Stated prefer-

ence survey 20% 50%


Evaluation category


tor

Unit of meas-

ure

Measurement method

Initial Evaluation

Shuttle bus

Threshold

vice

Transport patterns

Modal change

Induced mode changes in the other segments of

the journey

% of trips made by other modes comple-mentary to the system

% Demand mod-

elling tools 100% 30%

** System modal share % of trips made by the

new system %

Demand mod-elling tools

0% 75%

System use

** Total passengerkm travelled

Average total passen-gerkm travelled per

day pkm/day

Modelling tools

207 535

** Total N° of trips Average total number of passenger trips per

day trips/day Modelling

tools 125 1782

** Vehicle occupancy Mean number of peo-

ple per vehicle

passen-gers

/vehicle

Modelling tools

2 5

System perfor-mances

** Average Waiting time Mean waiting time at

the stops for vehicle to arrive

min Modelling

tools 7 1,2

** Effective system ca-pacity

Maximum possible number of passengers

passen-gers/day

Modelling tools

3.713 2.520


Evaluation category


tor

Unit of meas-

ure

Measurement method

Initial Evaluation

Shuttle bus

Threshold

Social Im-pacts

Spatial Accessibil-ity

** Change in range of key activities accessible within time thresholds

people accessing to a key activity in a given

time threshold %

Modelling tools

70% 100%

Environ-ment

Energy

** Daily consumption Average daily vehicle

consumption of energy kWh

Modelling tools

n.a 140


Energy used for pas-sengerkm

kWh/pkm

Calculated from daily

consumption and total pas-

sengerkm travelled

n.a 0,26

Climate change CO2 Carbon-dioxide emis-

sions per km g/km

Calculated from daily

consumption 950 0

Land take Loss of green space

from construction

Change in green space resulting directly from the construction

of the system

km2

Derived from the final plans

for system construction

0 0

Land take

** Change in road space availability to other us-

ers

Change in green space resulting directly from the construction

of the system

km2



0 0

Total land use change Change in green

space within the city km2




Evaluation category


tor

Unit of meas-

ure

Measurement method

Initial Evaluation

Shuttle bus

Threshold

Financial impacts

Start up costs **Track construction and

civil works Investment for track

and civil works €

From design and experts'

opinions 0 0

Start up costs

**Vehicle acquisi-tion/construction

Investment for the ve-hicle

€ Provided di-

rectly by WP15

100.000 Not yet de-

fined

**Control systems and apparatus

Investment for the con-trol systems

€ Provided di-

rectly by WP15

0 Not yet de-

fined

Operating costs

**Personnel Yearly cost of the per-

sonnel €/year


opinions 25.000 40.000

**Vehicle maintenance Vehicle yearly costs €/year Provided di-

rectly by WP15

18.000 Not yet de-

fined

**Track and civil infra-structures maintenance

Track yearly costs €/year From design and experts'

opinions 0 0

**Control system maintenance

Control system yearly costs

€/year Provided di-

rectly by WP15

0 Not yet de-

fined


Evaluation category


tor

Unit of meas-

ure

Measurement method

Initial Evaluation

Shuttle bus

Threshold

Revenues **Operating revenues Total yearly system

revenues €/year


opinions 0 0

Economic impacts

Temporary job provided by instal-lation and demon-

stration


People working in the demonstration

Per-son·year

s

From the demonstration

proposal 1 2+1

Efficiency

** Financial Net Present Value

Final result of Financial Cost-Benefit Analysis

Index Calculated

from financial impacts

n.a Not yet cal-

culated

** Socio-economic Net Present Value

Final result of Socio-economic Cost-Benefit

Analysis Index

Calculated from financial

impacts n.a

Not yet cal-culated

** Internal Rate of Re-turn

Alternative approach to the Net Present Value

Index Calculated


**Benefit/Cost Ratio Alternative approach to the Net Present Value

Index Calculated


n.a Not yet cal-

culated

(*) 1: Very low/5: Very high


9. System dimensioning

The Demand Analysis is based on a stated preference survey. This survey con-sisted in the submission of an on line questionnaire to the companies located in the selected site whose workers would be the main potential users of the ARTS.

The questionnaire included questions about:

Interest in the new service (ARTS)

The choice among a conventional minibus or an automated vehicle in dif-ferent

The importance of the presence of the driver in a public vehicle (open question).

The personal profile of the interviewee: age, gender, income of house-holds, education, occupation, car available in the household and if have a monthly ticket for public transport.

The number of interviews were 324 and 200 valid interviews (responded they are interested in the new transport system and they answered all the questions).

So, 61% of interviewers in Miramon were interested in the new service transport service.

Figure 26: Figure about question “Are you interested in this service?”

Then, four scenarios were shown based on the characteristics of the service

(fare, waiting time and riding time) and only in scenario 4, ARTS was chosen. Therefore, the target is sensitive to price and riding time and less to the wait-ing time.


Table 14: System dimensioning – Scenario 1

Scenario 1

Minibus Automated vehicle

Waiting time (minutes) 8 3

Riding time (minutes) 5 5

Fare As other public transport

means Extra fare of 2 EUR for a

return journey

Figure 27: Figure for choice “Scenario 1”


Scenario 2





means Extra fare of 2 EUR for a

return journey


60%

41%

Minibus ARTS

80%

20%

Minibus ARTS



Scenario 3





means As other public transport

means



Scenario 4





means As other public transport

means


68%

32%

Minibus ARTS

42%58%

Minibus ARTS


For further details see annexes for questionnaire, survey results, and motiva-

tions of the use of automated vehicles and figures of user preferences.

As summary for the system dimensioning can be highlighted the following: the daily demand foreseen for the ARTS is 1782 person and peak hour demand fore-seen for the ARTS is 657 passengers and doesn´t exceed the system capacity. The number of vehicles (fleet size) to serve that demand is 3 vehicles according to CTL pre-design method (Annex C-D1.1-D1.2). The type of service will be on demand.

Table 18: System dimensioning – Summary

Inputs

Length 2200

Number stops 7

Daily demand 1782

Vehicle capacity 10

Maximum vehicle speed (Km/h) 20

Maximum waiting time at stops (s) 250

Maximum waiting time at stops (m) 4,17

Outputs

Nº of vehicles circulating 3

Total vehicles.km run 139

Average commercial speed 19,25

Average occupancy 4,58

Comentario [M9]: Hemos utilizado el modelo fijado para el prediseño y no el modelo que in-dicaba para este caso


Figure 31: Selected site


10. Ex-ante evaluation

After the completion of the system design and dimensioning, the impacts and in-dicators selected in the initial evaluation step have been collected and measured in the ex-ante evaluation step.

The next table includes the set of impacts and indicators in the ex-ante evalua-tion of the system and their cross comparison with the correspondent reference case (see the corresponding thresholds for success in table within section “Initial evaluation”).


Table 19: Impacts expected - Comparison

Evaluation category


indicator Unit of

measure

Comparison

Shuttle bus

Threshold Ex ante

Acceptance

User acceptance

Reliability

Workers of

Miramon rely on

the new service

%

User satisfaction for the on

demand service

Workers of

Miramon who

prefer on de-

mand service

instead a fre-

quency service

%

** Integration with other

systems

Users of the us-

ers from other

systems

%

Willingness to

pay

** User willingness

Workers of

Miramon willing

to pay for an ex-

tra fare to use

the service

%

Authorities willingness

Public Authorities

willing to pay for %


Evaluation category


indicator Unit of

measure

Comparison

Shuttle bus

Threshold Ex ante

the demostration

Quality of

service

Information

Availability

Level of available

information of the

service

1-5(*) 2 4 n.a

Comprehensibility

Level of compre-

hensive infor-

mation of the

service

1-5(*)

2 4

n.a

Ticketing User satisfaction Level of the user

satisfaction

1-5(*) 2 4

n.a

Cleanliness Perceived cleanliness Level of the

cleaning

1-5(*) 3 4

n.a

Comfort ** Perceived comfort Level of comfort

perceived % 20% 50% 50%


Evaluation category


indicator Unit of

measure

Comparison

Shuttle bus

Threshold Ex ante

Transport patterns

Modal change

Induced mode changes in the other segments of the

journey

% of trips made by other modes complementary to the system

% 100% 30% 25%

** System modal share % of trips made by the new sys-

tem % 0% 75% 70%

System use

** Total passengerkm trav-elled

Average total passengerkm

travelled per day

pkm/day 207

535 500

** Total N° of trips

Average total number of pas-senger trips per

day

trips/day 125

1782 1782

** Vehicle occupancy Mean number of people per vehi-

cle

passengers /vehicle 2

5 4,5


Evaluation category


indicator Unit of

measure

Comparison

Shuttle bus

Threshold Ex ante

System perfor-mances

** Average Waiting time

Mean waiting time at the stops for vehicle to ar-

rive

min 7

1,2 1,5

** Effective system capacityMaximum possi-

ble number of passengers

passen-gers/day 3.713 2.520 2.520

Social Im-pacts

Spatial Accessi-bility

** Change in range of key activities accessible within

time thresholds

people accessing to a key activity in a given time

threshold

% 70% 100% 100%

Environment

Energy

** Daily consumption

Average daily vehicle con-

sumption of en-ergy

kWh n.a 140 140


Energy used for passengerkm

kWh/pkm

n.a 0,26 0,28

Climate change CO2 Carbon-dioxide emissions per

km g/km 950 0 0

Land take Loss of green space from

construction

Change in green space resulting directly from the construction of

km2 0 0 0


Evaluation category


indicator Unit of

measure

Comparison

Shuttle bus

Threshold Ex ante

the system

Land take

** Change in road space availability to other users

Change in green space resulting directly from the construction of

the system

km2

0

0 0

Total land use change Change in green space within the

city km2 0

Financial

impacts

Start up costs **Track construction and

civil works

Investment for

track and civil

works

€ 0 0 0

Start up costs

**Vehicle acquisi-

tion/construction

Investment for

the vehicle € 100.000

Not yet

defined

Not yet de-

fined

**Control systems and ap-

paratus

Investment for

the control sys-

tems

€ 0 Not yet

defined

Not yet de-

fined

Operating costs

**Personnel Yearly cost of the

personnel €/year 25.000 40.000 40.000

**Vehicle maintenance Vehicle yearly €/year 18.000 Not yet Not yet de-


Evaluation category


indicator Unit of

measure

Comparison

Shuttle bus

Threshold Ex ante

costs defined fined

**Track and civil infrastruc-

tures maintenance

Track yearly

costs €/year 0 0 0

**Control system mainte-

nance

Control system

yearly costs €/year 0

Not yet

defined

Not yet de-

fined

Revenues **Operating revenues Total yearly sys-

tem revenues €/year 0 0 0

Economic impacts

Temporary job provided by in-stallation and demonstration


People working in the demon-

stration

Person·years 1 2+1 2+1

Efficiency

** Financial Net Present Value

Final result of Financial Cost-Benefit Analysis

Index -- Not yet

calculated Not yet cal-

culated

** Socio-economic Net Present Value

Final result of Socio-economic

Cost-Benefit Analysis

Index --- Not yet


culated

** Internal Rate of Return Alternative ap-


Index ---


Evaluation category


indicator Unit of

measure

Comparison

Shuttle bus

Threshold Ex ante

**Benefit/Cost Ratio Alternative ap-


Index --- Not yet


culated

(*) 1: Very low / 5: Very high


11. Sources

11.1 Reference List

[1] Filippi F., Alessandrini A., Stam D., Chanard T., Janse M. (2004) Final evaluation report, Deliverable D6.3, CyberMove EU Project. Sixth European Framework Programme

[2] Alessandrini A., Filippi F., Stam D., Tripodi A., Pre-design method for advanced public transport systems, (2009), Public Transport - Planning and Operations, Springer, ISSN1866-749X, Volume 2, Combined 1-2

[3] MAESTRO CONSORTIUM (2000), Guidelines for transport in the 21st century, MAESTRO Project, European Commission Research contract number PL-97-2162, Brussels.

[4] Delle Site P., Filippi F., Usami D. (2005) Design of operations of personal rapid transit systems. Proc. 10th meeting of the EURO Working Group on Transporta-tion, Poznań, September.

[5] Lees-Miller J.D. (2011) Empty vehicle redistribution for personal rapid transit. A dissertation submitted to the university of Bristol, in accordance with the require-ments for award of the degree of PhD, July 2011.

[6] Mueller K., Sgouridis S.P. (2011) Simulation-based analysis of personal rapid transit systems: service and energy performance assessment of the Masdar City PRT case. Journal of Advanced Transportation 45(4), 252-270.

[7] Wilson, N.H.M., Weissberg, H. (1975) Advance Dial-A-Ride Algorithms Research Project: final report. Department of Civil Engineering, M.I.T., Boston.

[8] Jaw, J., Odoni A.R., Psaraftis H.N., Wilson N.H.M. (1986) A Heuristic Algorithm for The Multi-Vehicle Advance Request Dial-A-Ride Problem With Time Win-dows. Transportation Research B, Vol. 20B, No. 3. pp. 243–257.

[9] Delle Site P., Filippi F., Giustiniani G. (2011) Users’ preferences towards innova-tive and conventional public transport. Procedia - Social and Behavioural Scienc-es 20, 906-915.

[10] Marco S., Stam D. Guhnemann A., May A. D., Alessandrini A. (2008) Evaluation preparation for the ex-ante study, Deliverable D5.3.1a, CityMobil EU project. Sixth European Framework Programme.

[11] Stam D., Alessandrini A. (2011) Final ex-post report (focus on Rome and small demonstrations), Deliverable D5.2.4, CityMobil EU project. Sixth European Framework Programme.

[12] Parent, M. and Yang, M. (2004) Cybernetic Technologies for Cars in Chinese Cit-ies. Proceedings of CityTrans China 2004, Nov. 17–18, 2004. Shanghai, China.


[13] Cantarella, G.E. (2001) Introduzione alla tecnica dei trasporti e del traffico con elementi di economia dei trasporti. UTET, Torino.

[14] Gray, G.E. and Hoel, L.A. (1992) Public Transportation. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

[15] Schweizer, J. and Mantecchini L. (2007) Performance analysis of large scale PRT networks: theoretical capacity and microsimulations. Bologna University, DISTART Trasporti.

[16] Mindehoud, M.M. and Zuylen, H.J. (2002) Preliminary assessment of the opera-tion of a Personal Rapid Transit system in Eindhoven. IEE conference. Singa-pore, 3–6 september 2002.

[17] Tamhane A. (2006) Personal Rapid Transit in Uptown Cincinnati, Broadening Travel Options. Master of Community Planning thesis, University of Cincinnati.

[18] Raney, S., Paxson, J., Maymudes, D. (2007) Design of Personal Rapid Transit Circulator for Major Activity Center. Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2006. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, 2007, pp. 104–113.

[19] Anderson, J.E. (1998) Simulation of the operation of personal rapid transit sys-tems. Computers in Railways VI. Computational Mechanics Publications, WIT Press, Boston and Southampton.


Annex 1: Questionnaire


Annex 2: Survey results


Annex 3: Motivations of the use of automated vehicles


Annex 4: Figures of user preferences

local transport plans in san sebastian reviewed and considering

Documents