VICOM

Vitesse CommercialeCommercial Speed for surface public transport

1_Brussels a complex story2_Why the VICOM program?3_The VICOM investment program4_Exemples5_Benefits6_Conclusions

1.089.000 inhabitants (19 municipalities)

Brussels 157.000

Schaerbeek 121.000

Anderlecht 104.000

Molenbeek 90.000

increasing population (+200.000 in 2025)

332 km regional roads - 1.553 km local roads

Federal State of Belgium

Flanders WalloniaBrussels

Regional Government

19 municipalities

Police Zone

Police Zone

Police Zone

Police Zone

Police Zone

Police Zone

Mobility

Public Works

Town Planning

Mobility

Public Works

Town PlanningMobility

Public Works

Town Planning

BELIRIS

STIB

Why the VICOM program?Public spacededicated to

car users

Metro

40km network

150M passengers(50%)

Poor service of

Surface Public Transport

VICOM program starts in 2001

-Aging historic tram and busnetwork with very little investment in infrastructure (tramnetwork on narrow local central streets)

-Aging rolling stock (bus and tram)

-Public space is almost completely designed for car transport

-Majority of tramlines with commercial speed under 16km/h

-70% of buslines have a commercial speed of less than 16km/h

-A lot of ‘irregular’ services

Why the VICOM program?

-VICOM Task Force

General VICOM Coordinator

Mobile Brussel Administration (Strategy, Design, Maintainance)

Public Transport Company (MIVB-STIB)

(Urbanisme Administration, Federal Fund Beliris)

-Technical reference Manual : general design guidelines

-Budget : every year a budget is allocated to the VICOM program

(2010 : 19,5M€ 2011 :20,2 m€ 2012 : 22,4M€ 2013 : 27,4M€)

The VICOM investment program

STIB Regional Administration

Regional roads

Local roads

VICOM aims to improve quality standards for public transport-speed-regularity-frequency-comfort & safety (at stops)-high quality buses and trams

GOAL90% of tram network segregated from traffic40% of bus network on buslanes

PLANNING

-VICOM Black Spots

-Logic of Lines

-Regional Bike Infrastructure

-Age of (rail)infrastructure

The VICOM investment program

INFRASTRUCTURE

ExemplesBus& Bike lanes

-generalised along main axes-to improve approach to traffic lights

Intelligent bus & tramstops

ExemplesContraflow for Bus (tram)& Bike

ExemplesIntelligent traffic lights

Priority on bus and tramroutes

Bus and trams in pedestrian zones

Exemples

-For the Public Transport Company (and thus the taxpayer)

estimated 2,73 km/h difference in VICOM (2010)3.8M€ cost per extra km/h for bus&tramnetwork

(annually)est. gain busnetwork 2,73 x 3.8M€=10,37M€est. gain tramnetwork 2,73 x 3,8M€=10,37M€

or 20,74M€ annualy

Gains in commercial speed ���� Reduction of trip durationreduced need of rolling stock (1 tram 2.5M€)reduced need of staff (drivers)

�With an equivalent budget a better more regular service with higherfrequency is possible!!

Benefits

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Vitesse cient

Vitesse client sansmesures VICOM

-For the Public Transport Users

A theoretical excercise for the busnetwork

A practical approach

-faster service with reduced trip duration-better frequency-more offer (capacity) so more comfort

�For (almost) the same price a (much) better overal service is possible!!

Benefits

-Local and Regional (general) interests do NOT coincide

-NIMBY (parking, busstops,…)

-Very difficult communication (regional benefits, local problems,… for only a gain of 1 minute)

- « Concurrence » with other users (pedestrians, cyclists, cardrivers, local commercial activitities, parking management)

-Urbanistic (esthetic) integration of the infrastructure in the public space

���� Necessity to make « deals » with local municipalities te refind balance between local en regional interest (benefits)

…on a local level

-Multimodal attractive global projects are needed to convincemunicipalities and local residents

-More focused communication towards local residents and generalpublic.

Conclusion and lessons for the future

-an integrated (continuously) proces

-Benchmarking with other European cities-comparable investment programs-budgets-design

Jan Schollaertjschollaert@mrbc.irisnet.bewww.stib.bewww.mivb.be0032 499 588 154

Conclusion and lessons for the future