Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Transmilenio Bogotá – Evolution and                             challenges for the future            Juan Pablo Bocarejo, ...
Agenda1. Transmilenio basics2. Where should we be3. Challenges4. Research onTransmilenio                             2
1. Basics            3
1. Basics            Characteristics       PHASE 1   PHASE 2   PHASE 3Corridors                            3         3    ...
1. Basics                                                                       Articulated bus fleet                     ...
1. Basics                         2,00                                Passengers per day in the system                    ...
1. Basics Too                       Insufficient                                          Perception score of the system  ...
1. BasicsAccident Reduction                                                              800                              ...
2. Where should we be?22 corridors of BRT in 15 years?                                      9
2. Where should we be?              Metro + BRT + LRT?                                   10
3. Challenges•   Improve the existing system•   Equity – Accessibility issues•   SITP•   Rail technologies                ...
3. Challenges• Improve the existing system  – Operational optimization  – Simplify  – Fare collection system  – Use inform...
3. Challenges• Equity - Accessibility                                13
3. ChallengesSITP• An integrated system including  Transmilenio network (28%  share) and buses in mixed traffic  (72%)• A ...
3. ChallengesSITP• Operation concessions awarded to 9  companies• Technology concession awarded• Gradual and “calm” Implem...
3. Challenges                        •   Opposite to TS• SITP                       – Not a radical change in route design...
3. Challenges• The heart of the Air Quality Improvement  Policy  Change in emissions- PM2,5                               ...
3. Challenges Cra 7a  E2: 92 ug/m3.h                             E1: 9 ug/m3.h                          E2: 15 ug/m3.h    ...
3. Challenges• Rail  – A 25 km metro line, carrying 7% of    public transport demand  – Lower demand than Transmilenio  – ...
3. Research on Transmilenio                   Transmilenio and                   density                     We showed tha...
3. Research on Transmilenio                    Transmilenio and                    accessibility                       We ...
3. Research on TransmilenioImpact of Bus Rapid Transit Systems on Road SafetyLessons from Bogotá, ColombiaJuan Pablo Boca...
3. Research on TransmilenioCongestion cost in mass transit systems Case Study Bogota´s BRTGuerra G., Bocarejo JP          ...
3. Research on TransmilenioTRANSMILENIO BRT CAPACITY DETERMINATION USING A MICRO-SIMULATIONMODEL IN VISSIMORTIZ MA, BOCARE...
3. Research on TransmilenioROUTE CHOICE IN TRANSMILENIOESCOBAR D., LLERAS G.                                              ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Webinar: Transmilenio Bogotá: Evolution and challenges for the future

1,419 views

Published on

2013-03-21

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

Webinar: Transmilenio Bogotá: Evolution and challenges for the future

  1. 1. Transmilenio Bogotá – Evolution and challenges for the future Juan Pablo Bocarejo, PhD Associate professor Universidad de Los Andes SURGrupo de EstudiosEn SostenibilidadUrbana y Regional 1
  2. 2. Agenda1. Transmilenio basics2. Where should we be3. Challenges4. Research onTransmilenio 2
  3. 3. 1. Basics 3
  4. 4. 1. Basics Characteristics PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3Corridors 3 3 4Length of segregated lanes (Km) 42,4 42,3 31,6Number of stations 57 52 35Number of terminals 4 3 3Number of feeder zones 7 5 3Length of feeders lanes (Km) 346 100 -- 4
  5. 5. 1. Basics Articulated bus fleet 1.290 1.254 1.135 1.071 1.076 1.001 749 Feeder buses fleet 609 513 517 518 427 388 398336 2752004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 5
  6. 6. 1. Basics 2,00 Passengers per day in the system 1,80 1,73 1,66 1,60 1,58 1,40 1,47 Passengers (millions) 1,34 1,20 1,24 1,00 1,07 0,97 0,84 0,87 0,80 0,81 0,79 0,74 0,75 0,60 0,61 0,62 0,40 0,43 0,53 0,47 0,41 0,35 0,20 0,12 0,00 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Segregated Lanes Feeder Lanes 6
  7. 7. 1. Basics Too Insufficient Perception score of the system Blockin g spacesuccessful? Poor information access/ exit 5 Open 4,6 Institutional 4,5 4,1 4,1 doors – risk of 4 3,7 accidentsstability 3,5 3,3 3,6 3,4 3,2 3 3 3 2,8 Financial Score 2,5 Poor 2 signalingrestrictions? 1,5 1 Delayed 0,5 0expansion? 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 7
  8. 8. 1. BasicsAccident Reduction 800 675B/A Transmilenio 700 621 568 534 600 Accidents in the system 491Av. Caracas: 60% 500 439 419AV. NQS: 48% 400 Proportion of the total number of accidents/incidents 1.9% 1.7% 300 1.3% 1.4% 1.4% 1,3% 1,3% 200 100 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 12 11 Injured in the system 1.000 Deaths in the system 10 763 760 800 652 8 592 617 6 6 600 514 544 6 5 5 5 4 400 2 2 200 0 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Year Year 8
  9. 9. 2. Where should we be?22 corridors of BRT in 15 years? 9
  10. 10. 2. Where should we be? Metro + BRT + LRT? 10
  11. 11. 3. Challenges• Improve the existing system• Equity – Accessibility issues• SITP• Rail technologies 11
  12. 12. 3. Challenges• Improve the existing system – Operational optimization – Simplify – Fare collection system – Use information 12
  13. 13. 3. Challenges• Equity - Accessibility 13
  14. 14. 3. ChallengesSITP• An integrated system including Transmilenio network (28% share) and buses in mixed traffic (72%)• A centralized regulation (Transmilenio S.A)• Contracts with strong bus companies• Integrated fare system• ITS for operation optimization• Investment in terminals• A mixed retribution system to operators 14
  15. 15. 3. ChallengesSITP• Operation concessions awarded to 9 companies• Technology concession awarded• Gradual and “calm” Implementation• Institutional strengthening• Financing and investments by private companies 15
  16. 16. 3. Challenges • Opposite to TS• SITP – Not a radical change in route design – No big bang.. A “gradual” change … – The devil too gradual “Transantiago” – A “strong” institution • Some common mistakes – No infrastructure – Drastic reduction of fleet – Pressure on mass transit system • Some original mistakes – A 24 year concession – High cost of indemnity – Pressure on Transmilenio 16
  17. 17. 3. Challenges• The heart of the Air Quality Improvement Policy Change in emissions- PM2,5 17
  18. 18. 3. Challenges Cra 7a E2: 92 ug/m3.h E1: 9 ug/m3.h E2: 15 ug/m3.h E1: 6 ug/m3.h140 140120 120100 100 80 60 79% reduction 80 60 40 40 20 20 0 0 En Vehículo En el andén En Vehículo En el andén Concentración (ug/m3) Tiempo (min) Exposición (ug/m3.h) Concentración Tiempo (min) Exposición en esperaExposure WITHOUT SITP: 101 ug/m3.h Exposure SITP: 21 ug/m3.h
  19. 19. 3. Challenges• Rail – A 25 km metro line, carrying 7% of public transport demand – Lower demand than Transmilenio – A LRT network of 60 km? 19
  20. 20. 3. Research on Transmilenio Transmilenio and density We showed that Transmilenio was a significant variable influencing density growth We showed that free market and not land regulation lead changes in Bogota An unsettling question on housing quality and tradeoffs 20
  21. 21. 3. Research on Transmilenio Transmilenio and accessibility We proposed a way to evaluate equity issues trough calculation of accessibility to employment We showed that low income population had a better accessibility with a subsidy policy than with Transmilenio Phase 3 We showed that the effort of all social classes to access employment was much higher than the willingness to spend time and money 21
  22. 22. 3. Research on TransmilenioImpact of Bus Rapid Transit Systems on Road SafetyLessons from Bogotá, ColombiaJuan Pablo Bocarejo, Juan Miguel Velasquez, Claudia Andrea Díaz, and LuisEduardo Tafur Transmilenio and road safetyTransportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2317, TransportationResearch Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2012, pp. 1–7. We used GIS tools toDOI: 10.3141/2317-01 analyze the changes in accident patterns before and after Transmilenio Critical links changed drastically after Transmilenio, but remained similar afterwards We could not find a relationship between critical accidents and station attendance BRT on high speed roads produced different patterns and higher hot spots than in signalized corridors. 22
  23. 23. 3. Research on TransmilenioCongestion cost in mass transit systems Case Study Bogota´s BRTGuerra G., Bocarejo JP Transmilenio and congestion We calculated the social cost of congestion in Transmilenio to be US$ 7000 in peak hour We showed that to obtain an optimal situation, bus occupancy should be 5,4 pas/m2 and not 6,3 pas/m2 according to a SPS. We proposed a way to calculate an investment in comfort that would eliminate the congestion cost. 23
  24. 24. 3. Research on TransmilenioTRANSMILENIO BRT CAPACITY DETERMINATION USING A MICRO-SIMULATIONMODEL IN VISSIMORTIZ MA, BOCAREJO JPWCTR, 2013 Transmilenio and road safety We showed that including stochasticity and randomness using a micro- simulation tool the estimation of the BRT capacity changed The micro-simulation showed that the sum of stop points capacities in a station is different to the capacity of the simultaneous operation Capacity of a system with express routes is not the sum of the individual capacity. Depending of the number of express buses, capacity curve will vary 24
  25. 25. 3. Research on TransmilenioROUTE CHOICE IN TRANSMILENIOESCOBAR D., LLERAS G. Transmilenio and route selection We showed that most of TM users do not consider more than one route option Users are not aware of the available options Transmilenio offers for their trip Congestion in stations induces different travel decisions Available Lack of information 9% options generates suboptimal 2% decisions 27% 62% 25

×