CERN city study

Transcription

CERN city study

CITIES DEMONSTRATING AUTOMATED ROAD PASSANGER TRANSPORT
CERN city study
SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME
THEME SST.2012.3.1-4.
AUTOMATED URBAN VEHICLES
COLLABORATIVE PROJECT – GRANT AGREEMENT N°: 314190
Deliverable number:
D12.1
Delivery date (planned):
31 October 2013
Delivery date (actual):
29 November 2013
Authors:
Frédéric Magnin (1)
Co-authors:
Anne Koymans (2), Barbara Monnier (2)
Eduardo Camacho-Hübner (3), Timothée Vincent (3)
Affiliations:
1. CERN
2. GEA, Vallotton et Chanard, SA
3. Transitec Ingénieurs Conseils
Document control sheet
CERN city study
Title
CERN
Creator
CERN
Editor
Brief Description
Planning study of a six months demonstration within CERN
Publisher
Contributors
Type (Deliverable/Milestone)
Deliverable
Word
Format
01 November 2012
Creation date
Version number
Final
29-11-2013
Version date
Last modified by
Frédéric Magnin
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
Page | 2
Date
Modified by
Comments
D12.1 CERN city study, work version
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................11
1.
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................13
1.1
FRAMEWORK .....................................................................................................13
1.2
GOALS AND SCOPE.............................................................................................13
1.3
METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................13
1.4
CERN GENERAL OVERVIEW ................................................................................14
1.4.1
2.
3.
CERN presentation and localisation .............................................................14
CITY ASSESSMENT .....................................................................................17
2.1
CERN STRUCTURE ............................................................................................17
2.2
CERN SURROUNDINGS ......................................................................................19
2.3
LAND USE ..........................................................................................................20
2.4
MAIN DISCONTINUITIES .......................................................................................22
2.5
CERN POPULATION ...........................................................................................24
2.6
MEYRIN AND PRÉVESSIN MAIN POLES ..................................................................25
2.6.1
Population per building .................................................................................25
2.6.2
Mobility attractors and generators.................................................................28
2.7
VISITING CERN .................................................................................................31
2.8
REGIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING AND MAIN FUTURE PROJECTS .............................31
LOCAL TRANSPORT NETWORK ASSESSMENT........................................34
3.1
MOBILITY HABITS OF CERN USERS .....................................................................34
3.2
ACCESSIBILITY FROM OUTSIDE CERN .................................................................34
3.2.1
Accessibility by road .....................................................................................34
3.2.2
Accessibility by public transport ....................................................................36
3.2.3
Accessibility by soft modes ...........................................................................37
3.2.4
Synthesis ......................................................................................................37
3.3
TRIPS INTERNAL TO CERN’S DOMAIN ..................................................................40
3.3.1
Page | 3
Road network ...............................................................................................40
3.3.2
Shuttles operation.........................................................................................43
3.3.3
Soft modes network ......................................................................................46
3.3.4
Summary of Trips internal to CERN domain .................................................48
3.4
4.
5.
PROBLEMS, OBJECTIVES AND EXPECTED IMPACTS .............................50
4.1
PROBLEMS ........................................................................................................50
4.2
OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................50
4.3
EXPECTED IMPACTS ...........................................................................................51
MULTIMODAL CONCEPT AND CERN POTENTIAL SITES .........................52
5.1
GENERAL MULTIMODAL CONCEPT AND DEPLOYMENT STEPS ..................................52
5.2
P1: MEYRIN POTENTIAL SITE ...............................................................................56
5.2.1
Demand estimation.......................................................................................57
5.2.2
System pre-design........................................................................................57
5.3
6.
7.
RANGE OF SOLUTIONS PROVIDED BY CERN ........................................................49
P2: PRÉVESSIN POTENTIAL SITE ..........................................................................58
5.3.1
Demand estimation.......................................................................................59
5.3.2
System pre-design........................................................................................59
CERN INTRA POLE SITE SELECTION ........................................................60
6.1
INITIAL ASSESSMENT ..........................................................................................61
6.2
INITIAL PRACTICAL FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS .............................................................61
6.2.1
Technical promptness ..................................................................................61
6.2.2
Legal and Governance promptness ..............................................................62
6.2.3
Economical promptness ...............................................................................62
6.2.4
Population promptness .................................................................................62
6.2.5
Summary of the initial practical feasibility analysis ........................................62
INITIAL EVALUATION ...................................................................................63
7.1
MEASUREMENT METHODS ...................................................................................64
7.1.1
User interview...............................................................................................64
7.1.2
Data collection ..............................................................................................64
7.1.2.1
Page | 4
System implementation...................................................................................... 64
7.2
8.
7.1.2.2
Vehicle and system logbooks ............................................................................ 65
7.1.2.3
Calculations ....................................................................................................... 65
REFERENCE CASE AND SUCCESS THRESHOLD ......................................................66
7.2.1
Indicators evaluating User’s Acceptance ......................................................66
7.2.2
Indicators evaluating Quality of Service ........................................................67
7.2.3
Indicators evaluating Social Impacts .............................................................69
7.2.4
Indicators evaluating Environment ................................................................69
7.2.5
Indicators evaluating Financial Impacts ........................................................70
7.2.6
Indicators evaluating Economic Impacts .......................................................70
SYSTEM DIMENSIONING .............................................................................72
8.1
DEMAND ANALYSIS .............................................................................................72
8.1.1
Description of the line, stops and catchment areas .......................................72
8.1.2
Variations of mobility patterns depending on the period of day .....................73
8.1.3
Origin-destination pairs and cumulative demand on each link ......................74
8.2
SUPPLY DIMENSIONING .......................................................................................78
8.2.1
Capacity of the automated system and comparison with demand.................78
8.2.2
Exploitation concept .....................................................................................81
8.2.2.1
Morning peak-hour operating concept ............................................................... 81
8.2.2.2
Lunch-time operating concept ........................................................................... 83
8.2.2.3
Afternoon peak-hour operating concept ............................................................ 83
8.2.2.4
Off-peak operating concept ............................................................................... 83
8.2.3
9.
Conclusion and suggested improvement ......................................................84
URBAN INTEGRATION .................................................................................86
9.1
SHARING THE ROAD............................................................................................86
9.2
VEHICLE CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................86
9.3
MAINTENANCE DEPOT AND CONTROL STATION .....................................................86
9.4
THE ROUTE ........................................................................................................87
9.5
STATIONS ..........................................................................................................90
9.6
MARKING ...........................................................................................................92
Page | 5
9.7
ACCOMPANYING MEASURES ................................................................................93
10. CITIZEN AWARENESS .................................................................................94
10.1
CITIZEN AWARENESS CAMPAIGN CONTEXT ...........................................................94
10.2
CITIZEN AWARENESS CAMPAIGN AIM AND OBJECTIVES ..........................................94
10.3
TARGET POPULATION SEGMENTATION AND BASELINE EVALUATION.........................95
10.4
STAKEHOLDERS AND POLITICAL SUPPORT ............................................................95
10.5
SOCIAL MARKETING MIX .....................................................................................95
10.5.1
Product or Social Idea ..............................................................................95
10.5.2
Price .........................................................................................................95
10.5.3
Place, Promotion and People ...................................................................95
10.5.4
Processes.................................................................................................96
10.6
SWOT ANALYSIS ...............................................................................................96
10.7
MONITORING AND EVALUATION PLAN ...................................................................97
11. EX-ANTE EVALUATION ................................................................................98
12. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................101
13. SOURCES ...................................................................................................102
14. ANNEX A: VOLTAIR FIVE-STEP METHODOLOGY ...................................104
15. ANNEX B: CERN HISTORY ........................................................................105
16. ANNEX C: SURROUNDINGS ATTRACTORS AND GENERATORS ..........107
17. ANNEX D: POINTS OF INTEREST FOR VISITORS ...................................110
18. ANNEX E: THE FVG AGGLOMERATION ...................................................112
19. ANNEX F: ACCESSIBILITY ISOCHRONES ................................................115
20. ANNEX G: CERN TRANSPORT POSSIBILITIES........................................117
21. ANNEX H: EXPERT EVALUATION .............................................................119
22. ANNEX I: DEMAND ANALYSIS ...................................................................124
23. ANNEX J: CTL PRE-DESIGN METHOD .....................................................126
Page | 6
24. ANNEX K: DEMAND DIMENSIONING ASSUMPTIONS .............................127
List of figures
FIGURE 1: CERN LOCATION WITHIN THE FVG AGGLOMERATION ...........................................15
FIGURE 2: LOCATION OF CERN WITHIN SWISS AND FRENCH COUNTRIES. .............................16
FIGURE 3: CERN OVERALL PERIMETER AND AGGREGATED SITES .........................................18
FIGURE 4: CERN SURROUNDINGS LAND USE .......................................................................21
FIGURE 5: MAIN DISCONTINUITIES AROUND CERN SITE .......................................................23
FIGURE 6: CERN NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER ZONE ................................................................24
FIGURE 7: NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER BUILDING IN MEYRIN .....................................................26
FIGURE 8: NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER BUILDING IN PRÉVESSIN ................................................27
FIGURE 9: MEYRIN MAIN POLE MOBILITY ATTRACTORS AND GENERATORS ..............................29
FIGURE 10: PRÉVESSIN MAIN POLE MOBILITY ATTRACTORS AND GENERATORS ......................30
FIGURE 11: PACA PERIMETERS .........................................................................................32
FIGURE 12: ROAD NETWORK AROUND CERN OVERALL PERIMETER ......................................35
FIGURE 13: PUBLIC TRANSPORT NETWORK AROUND CERN OVERALL PERIMETER..................38
FIGURE 14: SOFT MODES NETWORK TO ACCESS CERN MAIN POLES .....................................39
FIGURE 15: MEYRIN MAIN POLE ROAD NETWORK .................................................................41
FIGURE 16: PRÉVESSIN MAIN POLE ROAD NETWORK ............................................................42
FIGURE 17: CERN'S SHUTTLE NETWORK ............................................................................44
FIGURE 18: DESCRIPTION OF CERN SHUTTLES ANNUAL OCCUPANCY (SOURCE: CERN’S GS,
2012) .......................................................................................................................45
FIGURE 19: PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL TIMES INSIDE MEYRIN .......................................................46
FIGURE 20: BIKE TRAVEL TIMES INSIDE MEYRIN ...................................................................47
FIGURE 21: PEDESTRIAN TRAVEL TIMES INSIDE PRÉVESSIN ..................................................47
FIGURE 22: BIKE TRAVEL TIMES INSIDE PRÉVESSIN..............................................................48
FIGURE 23 : ILLUSTRATION OF THE VARIETY OF TRIPS BETWEEN CERN POLES ......................52
FIGURE 24 : GENERAL MULTIMODAL CONCEPT FOR CERN FOR THE LONG-TERM (POST 2025)54
Page | 7
FIGURE 25 : PROPOSAL OF PHASING TOWARDS GENERAL MULTIMODAL CONCEPT (TO BE
ADAPTED) ..................................................................................................................55
FIGURE 26 : PHASE 1 CONCEPT FOR MEYRIN (TO BE ADAPTED) ...........................................56
FIGURE 27: PHASE 1 CONCEPT FOR PRÉVESSIN (TO BE ADAPTED) .......................................58
FIGURE 28: ANALYSED DEMONSTRATION ROUTES ................................................................60
FIGURE 29: LIKERT SCALE EXAMPLE ...................................................................................64
FIGURE 30 : ESTIMATION OF DAILY NUMBER OF TRIPS BY PRIVATE CAR INSIDE MEYRIN ..........72
FIGURE 31 : COMPARISON OF TRAVEL TIMES BETWEEN WALKING AND THE AUTOMATED SYSTEM
................................................................................................................................74
FIGURE 32 : DEMAND CHARACTERIZATION FOR THE "MORNING PEAK-HOUR" .........................75
FIGURE 33 : DEMAND CHARACTERIZATION FOR THE " LUNCH-TIME REPRESENTATIVE HOUR" ...76
FIGURE 34 : DEMAND CHARACTERIZATION FOR THE "LATE AFTERNOON PEAK-HOUR" .............77
FIGURE 35 : DEMAND LOADS PER LINK – MORNING PEAK-HOUR ............................................80
FIGURE 36 : DEMAND LOADS PER LINK – LUNCH-TIME REPRESENTATIVE HOUR ......................80
FIGURE 37 : DEMAND LOADS PER LINK – LATE AFTERNOON PEAK-HOUR ................................81
FIGURE 38 : OPERATING SCHEME FOR THE MORNING PEAK-HOUR – "THREE SYNCHRONOUS
DUETS" .....................................................................................................................82
FIGURE 39 : OPERATING SCHEME FOR THE MORNING PEAK-HOUR – "6-VEHICLE REGULARINTERVAL SERVICE" ....................................................................................................82
FIGURE 40 : DAILY EVOLUTION OF OPERATING SCHEMES .....................................................84
FIGURE 41: INTEGRATION PLAN – “33” STATION ...................................................................87
FIGURE 42: INTEGRATION PLAN - "500" STATION ..................................................................88
FIGURE 43: INTEGRATION PLAN - "HOTEL" STATION .............................................................89
FIGURE 44: INTEGRATION PLAN - "RESTAURANT 2" STATION .................................................90
FIGURE 45: INTEGRATION PLAN - "PS AREA" STATION ..........................................................91
FIGURE 46: "PS AREA" STATION .........................................................................................91
FIGURE 47: VERTICAL SIGNAGE ..........................................................................................92
FIGURE 48: HORIZONTAL SIGNAGE .....................................................................................92
FIGURE 49: VOLTAIR METHODOLOGY ...............................................................................104
FIGURE 50: CERN INTERNAL SITES IN THE REGION (SOURCE: (CERN DIRECTORY)) ............106
Page | 8
FIGURE 51: MAIN FACILITIES AROUND CERN OVERALL PERIMETER.....................................109
FIGURE 52: P1: MEYRIN MAIN POLE INTEREST POINTS FOR VISITS.......................................110
FIGURE 53: P2: PRÉVESSIN MAIN POLE INTEREST POINTS FOR VISITS .................................111
FIGURE 54: ISOCHRONES OF ROAD TRANSPORT ACCESSIBILITY ..........................................115
FIGURE 55: ISOCHRONES OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT ACCESSIBILITY ........................................115
FIGURE 56: ISOCHRONES OF BIKE ACCESSIBILITY ..............................................................116
FIGURE 57 : ESTIMATION OF DAILY NUMBER OF TRIPS BY PRIVATE CAR INSIDE MEYRIN ........124
List of tables
TABLE 1: CERN ENTAILING FRENCH MUNICIPALITIES ...........................................................19
TABLE 2: PUBLIC TRANSPORT NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS TO ACCESS CERN MAIN POLES OF
MEYRIN AND PRÉVESSIN ............................................................................................36
TABLE 3: CERN'S SHUTTLE NETWORK CHARACTERISTICS ....................................................43
TABLE 4: ANNUAL OCCUPANCY OF CERN SHUTTLE SERVICES (SOURCE: CERN’S GS, 2012)45
TABLE 5: CERN OFFICIAL TRANSPORT POSSIBILITIES (CERN DIRECTORY) ............................49
TABLE 6: EXPECTED IMPACTS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTS........................................51
TABLE 7: INDICATORS TO BE MEASURED TO EVALUATE THE IMPACTS OF THE DEMONSTRATION
................................................................................................................................63
TABLE 8: INDICATORS EVALUATING USER'S ACCEPTANCE (1) ...............................................66
TABLE 9: INDICATORS EVALUATING USER'S ACCEPTANCE (2) ...............................................67
TABLE 10: INDICATORS EVALUATING QUALITY OF SERVICE (1)..............................................67
TABLE 11: SHUTTLE SERVICE CIRCUIT 1 CHARACTERISTICS ..................................................68
TABLE 12: INDICATORS EVALUATING QUALITY OF SERVICE (2)..............................................69
TABLE 13: INDICATORS EVALUATING SOCIAL IMPACTS .........................................................69
TABLE 14: INDICATORS EVALUATING ENVIRONMENT.............................................................70
TABLE 15: INDICATORS EVALUATING FINANCIAL IMPACTS .....................................................70
TABLE 16: INDICATORS EVALUATING ECONOMIC IMPACTS ....................................................71
TABLE 17: HYPOTHESES AND INPUT DATA ...........................................................................78
TABLE 18: CALCULATION OF THE AUTOMATED SYSTEM CAPACITY .........................................79
Page | 9
TABLE 19: INDICATORS FOR THE EX-ANTE EVALUATION .......................................................98
TABLE 20: TRAVEL TIMES PER O_D ....................................................................................99
TABLE 21: POINTS OF INTEREST FOR VISITORS ..................................................................110
TABLE 22: SECOND DEVELOPMENT AXIS - URBANIZATION MEASURES ..................................112
TABLE 23: SECOND DEVELOPMENT AXIS - TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE MEASURES .113
TABLE 24: FIRST DEVELOPMENT AXIS - TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE MEASURES .....114
TABLE 25: FIRST DEVELOPMENT AXIS - URBANIZATION MEASURES ......................................114
TABLE 26: CERN OFFICIAL TRANSPORT POSSIBILITIES (CERN DIRECTORY) ........................117
TABLE 27: "IN ACCESS" TO CERN TRIPS DESCRIPTION ......................................................125
TABLE 28: CERN INTRA-POLE TRIPS DESCRIPTION ............................................................125
TABLE 29: TRIPS INSIDE MEYRIN POLE DESCRIPTION .........................................................125
Page | 10
Executive summary
European cities face four main mobility problems: congestion, land use, safety and environment. One of the main causes of such problems is the car-ownership rate. The centres
of large cities address this issue combining efficient mass transits with car restriction policies but peripheral areas and smaller cities remain dominated by private cars.
CityMobil has demonstrated how automated road vehicles can lead to different transport
concepts. However CityMobil has also highlighted three main barriers to the deployment
of automated road vehicles: the implementation framework, the legal framework and the
unknown wider economic effect. The CityMobil2 goal is to address these barriers and finally to remove them. In this context CERN is one of the 12 partner cities.
This study aims at identifying the strategic, legal, economical and technical context for a
potential large scale ARTS demonstration and potential future deployment.
The first part of the report develops a detailed analysis of the CERN site operations, the
current mobility situation and the overall integration in the regional environment.
The second part of the report identifies the current mobility issues and proposes a long
term multimodal concept which could potentially address the actual problems and improve
inter and intra site mobility. Within the multi modal concept the role that could be played
by ARTS is analysed in greater details.
The last part of the report concentrates on analysing the potential for an on-site large scale
demonstration of automated road transport.
Finally, while the identified track makes sense on the demand and supply side, the potential timing for a large scale demonstration is not in line with CERN mobility agenda. The
primary reasons for this are strategic, economic and legal limitations. Hence, at this stage
CERN is contemplating hosting an ARTS showcase within Citymobil2.
Page | 11
Terminology
In the present report, the following terminology is adopted:
•
CERN overall perimeter: includes the entire area comprising all the elements belonging to CERN, including the underground LHC and SPS rings.
•
CERN urbanized area: part of the CERN overall perimeter occupied by buildings
or activities. The urbanized parts are scattered throughout the territory.
•
CERN site: includes the CERN poles located around the SPS ring.
•
CERN pole: closed element distributed at the surface of the underground rings.
The CERN overall perimeter is constituted of 17 poles of which the two main ones
are Meyrin and Prévessin.
•
CERN zone: constitutes a subdivision of each of the two main poles of Meyrin and
Prévessin.
•
ARTS: Automated road transport system
Past and present experiences on innovative mobility
Although engaged in many European funded-projects in Framework Programme 6 and 7,
within the fields of basic and applied science, it is the very first time that CERN enrols an
innovative transportation European project that aims on the deployment of automated vehicles.
Nevertheless, the particular needs of mobility of its employees, periodic inhabitants, users
and visitors have strengthen the call for CERN mobility initiatives, which have been put in
place over the last years. CERN territory and these initiatives are presented in the following chapters.
Page | 12
1. Introduction
This chapter describes the context of the territorial analysis presented in this report. At first,
the goals and methodology of the study are presented. The area of analysis is then briefly introduced.
1.1 Framework
Part of the EU 7th Framework Programme (FP7), the European project CityMobil2, launched
in September 2012 for a 4 years period, is establishing a pilot platform for automated road
transport systems, to be implemented in several urban environments across Europe. Although
the interest in automated systems has been growing amidst urban authorities in Europe, there
are still some barriers hampering their deployment. CityMobil2 project is deeply committed to
address and remove these barriers, namely: the legal framework, which nowadays does not
allow self-driving vehicles on conventional roads; the on-site implementation framework; and
the uncertainty of the wider economic impact of this technology following take-up.
The European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) is one of the 12 partner cities that
comprises the CityMobil2 consortium, and takes part of the bidding to be one of the five selected sites to host an on-site demonstration.
The present document, cited as D12.1, constitutes the first deliverable of WP12 and presents
the CERN city study, which will support the CERN’s candidacy proposal for a CityMobil2
on-site demonstration (deliverable D12.2).
1.2 Goals and scope
The goal of the city study is to carry out a detailed analysis of the CERN perimeter and its users’ mobility needs in order to identify the missing links within the existent mobility system,
which ones can be taken in charge by ARTS (Automated Road Transport System). This investigation provides the foundation for developing a multimodal strategy concept, which combines innovative and traditional transport modes, in order to provide improved mobility solutions for the target mobility links and its economic defining principles.
In the framework of CityMobil2, the city study provides the core basis of the candidacy proposal of CERN to be one of the five city partners of this EU project to host an on-site demonstration of 6 months between 2014 and 2016.
The study area of this study comprises the CERN overall site perimeter, which will be described in further detail in Chapter 2.
1.3 Methodology
The methodology that conducts the present study follows the objectives of Phase 1 – City
Study Phase, which derive from the MAESTRO guidelines and has been adapted to the
CityMobil2 purposes, combined with the milestones of the VOLTair methodology (GEA
Vallotton et Chanard SA, Transitec, December 2004).
Page | 13
D12.1 CERN City Study
The City Study Phase is done following these steps:
1. Analysis of the local planning and transport context, as well as the main opportunities and
challenges in terms of land-use and transport strategies (diagnosis);
2. Identification of the key problems, objectives and expected impacts;
3. Identification and brief description of the potential for ARTS implementation;
4. Selection of the target area for a detailed diagnosis and definition of a multimodal concept;
5. Selection of the potential sites within the CERN study area, targeting a gradual deployment
of ARTS within the CERN site and allowing a demonstration proposal to be built upon;
6. Initial evaluation;
7. System dimensioning;
8. Ex-ante evaluation and practical feasibility analysis.
The detailed diagnosis and definition of a multimodal concept will be entailed by the VOLTair methodology. This methodology is built upon a “top-down” approach that combines both
a global and local scale analysis within a pre-defined urban perimeter (agglomeration, city,
commune or site). It is based on two complementary approaches:
•
A functional approach, focused on transport infrastructure, planning and operation;
•
A societal / environmental approach, combining the overall territorial dimension
(land-use, urban planning, urban integration, etc.).
Within the study perimeter a multimodal concept will be developed, which will address a
global functional land-use and mobility strategy to be implemented through operational
measures 1.
In the framework of CityMobil2, the transport tool, i.e., two innovative systems have been
selected (5 initial manufacturers); candidate cities will thus adapt their proposal according to
the characteristics of the selected innovative transport systems.
1.4 CERN general overview
1.4.1 CERN presentation and localisation
The European Organization for Nuclear Research, hereinafter referred to by the acronym
CERN, is an international organization based on the northwest periphery of the Swiss city of
Geneva. It comprises 20 member states and its main purpose is to operate the largest particle
physics laboratory in the world 2.
1
Annex A provides more details on VOLTair five-steps methodology.
2
Page | 14
Annex B provides more details on the CERN telling its story since 1949.
CERN is one among several institutions headquartered in the Geneva canton. About 10’000
persons work on the site every day and it can thus be perceived as an urban entity, located in a
peripheral zone. It constitutes a research campus as well as a scientific neighbourhood in between Swiss and French territories.
In a broader context, CERN is located in the heart of the “Franco-Valdo-Genevoise” 3 (FVG)
agglomeration. It is located less than 4 kilometres from Geneva airport, making it very accessible from abroad. Figure 1 shows the positioning of CERN in the agglomeration and Figure 2
locates CERN in relation with the nearest centralities.
Figure 1: CERN location within the FVG agglomeration
3
The political and spatial organization named the FVG agglomeration results on border cooperation between the territories
of the Canton of Geneva, the District of Nyon, in the canton of Vaud (CH), and the neighbouring communes of the French
departments of Ain, Haute-Savoie and the Rhone-Alpes region.
Page | 15
Figure 2: Location of CERN within Swiss and French countries.
Page | 16
2. City assessment
This chapter gives an overview of the urban territory of CERN and its surroundings using the
societal and environmental approach of the VOLTair methodology, combining the overall territorial dimensions.
The CERN structure is first detailed based on the proposed terminology. The CERN surroundings are then analysed to understand the context in which the organization fits. The population in the vicinity of CERN, the main mobility attractors and generators as well as the
main discontinuities in the territory are observed. The population of CERN is then described
before focusing on both main poles of Meyrin and Prévessin. A section is then dedicated to
visitors, to their points of interest and to the operation of the service that is dedicated to them.
Finally, the last section presents the regional and local planning in which CERN will develop
in the coming years as well as the internal projects under development.
2.1 CERN structure
The overall CERN perimeter delimitates a total area of 590 ha. It is constituted of a total of 17
poles that are located between France and Switzerland.
The urbanized area accounts for circa 30% of the overall CERN perimeter. It currently occupies 170 hectares with the two main centralities of Meyrin (105 hectares) and Prévessin (60
hectares) accounting for the majority.
The CERN site, shown on Figure 3 below, is composed of more than 600 buildings split into
four categories:
•
laboratories
•
offices (administrative, meeting rooms, amphitheatres, etc.)
•
industrial and infrastructure (industrial halls, storage, workshop, etc.)
•
services / facilities (restaurant, kindergarten, sport clubs, etc.)
All these buildings are served by a multiplicity of services and an intra-pole road network that
links all possible niches located within the poles.
Page | 17
Figure 3: CERN overall perimeter and aggregated sites
Page | 18
2.2 CERN surroundings
As already mentioned, the CERN overall perimeter is located in both French and Swiss territories. The French part of the perimeter is located within 10 communes of the Ain department
in the Rhône-Alpes region while the Swiss part is situated within 4 communes which belong
to the Geneva canton. Each municipality entailing CERN overall perimeter is detailed in Table 1.
Swiss communes entailing CERN site
Swiss communes
Meyrin
Satigny
Grand-Saconnex
Vernier
Total
# of inhabitants
(2013)
22'250
3'970
11'991
34’513
37'707
Surface
(ha)
994
1'892
438
768
3'324
Population Density
(inhab/km2)
2'238
210
2'738
4’494
Surface
(ha)
584
2'747
1'644
478
564
1'209
324
946
977
589
10'062
Population Density
(inhab/km2)
211
68
99
1'679
626
495
509
209
912
364
French communes entailing CERN site
French communes
Chevry
Crozet
Echenevex
Ferney-Voltaire
Ornex 4
Prévessin-Moëns
Ségny
Sergy
St. Genis-Pouilly
Versonnex
Total
# of inhabitants
(2010)
1'235
1'862
1'631
8'025
3'531
5'980
1'649
1'977
8'914
2'144
36'948
Table 1: CERN entailing French municipalities
5
It can be observed that while the total number of inhabitants between the overall French and
Swiss municipalities is rather equal, even accounting for the differences that may occur from
the different years of Swiss and French data sources, the Swiss CERN site bordering communes are much more densely inhabited than the French counterpart, which emphasizes the
4
Ornex includes Maconnex
5
Source : INSEE, Swiss stats – Statistiques cantonales and Republique et Canton of Geneva
Page | 19
more urban characteristics of the Swiss neighbouring territory, when compared to the French
one.
Following a study of the different mobility attraction and generation poles within the CERN
surroundings that can be found in Annex C, it has been observed that most of the identified
facilities are also located in the Swiss territory. However, the equipment’s located in France
have a higher use value for the people working at CERN. This is primarily explained by the
fact that the majority of the CERN employees live in neighbouring France.
Despite their small size, the French villages located in the vicinity of CERN are therefore major trip generators and attractors compared to the city of Geneva. This spatial configuration
plays an important role in the overall functioning of the organization and in the heavy presence of private cars (Chapter 3).
2.3 Land use
The regional scale shows that the site is surrounded by the Jura Mountain on the west and
north side, while the east is mainly composed with urbanisation and the lake. South, industrials areas and villages follow one another.
In the close proximity, the CERN surroundings are mainly committed to urbanisation, farming areas, forest, rivers and vineyards. The built areas are dedicated to housing and industrial
activities.
The land use is shown below in Figure 4.
Page | 20
Figure 4: CERN surroundings land use
Page | 21
2.4 Main discontinuities
Within the local environment some elements create cutting effects. These elements can be
summarized as follows:
•
Landscape features
o The forest area between the Meyrin and Prévessin poles ;
o No visual landmarks which would help to be located, affecting the perception
of the distances.
o Compact rows of trees along the main roads
•
Transport infrastructures
o The sections of the Route de Meyrin, which crosses both Swiss and French territories
o The D35 road heading to the French commune of Ferney-Voltaire
o Parking
•
Functional features
o CERN perimeter: access restriction
o Some impassable buildings, involving detours
o Experimental and storage areas with more or less access restriction.
The Franco-Swiss border is an administrative boundary that has no impact on the CERN poles
as the Meyrin main pole functions as an entity. Despite the fact that the border crosses Meyrin
main pole, it is not visible inside the pole. Only the congestion created by the custom on the
Route de Meyrin can be considered as a binding element even though Switzerland joined the
Schengen area.
All these discontinuities are shown below in Figure 5.
Page | 22
Figure 5: Main discontinuities around CERN site
Page | 23
2.5 CERN population
CERN’s population consists of staff members (~ 2’400), CERN users and visitors. The CERN
users are essentially physicists (~ 10’000), contractors (~ 3’800) and students. On average, the
population effectively on the site on a daily basis is of about 10’000 people. This number fluctuates though seasonally with peaks during the summer periods and lows around yearend.
CERN’s population can be divided into four categories of users: employees of CERN who
have assigned offices, service contractors coming from outside CERN, students and tourist
visitors. The latest have specific needs and therefore are treated separately in Chapter 2.7.
Figure 6 shows the CERN zones within Meyrin and Prévessin main poles and the estimated
number of people in each zone. These numbers correspond to the total number of offices. The
difference between the total number of offices and the daily population is due to a high number of floating people on site (about 1’800 persons concerned) essentially contractors.
The distribution of the employees’ offices per building in both Meyrin and Prévessin main
poles are shown in Chapter 2.6.
Figure 6: CERN number of people per zone
Page | 24
2.6 Meyrin and Prévessin main poles
Meyrin main pole is the largest CERN pole. It is located both in France and Switzerland but
the main entrance is located on Swiss territory.
The proximity of the pole with the Route de Meyrin creates a divide and make that some elements are found on the other side of the roadway as, for example, the Globe of Science and
Innovation 6 or the SM18 hall where accelerators magnets are tested.
The development of Meyrin main pole has been done in response to specific needs and opportunities of the laboratory and not in the framework of a higher and overall site planning. Different needs have emerged with the increase of the CERN population until it reaches a critical
mass that caused the apparition of new urban needs and behaviours. One can now find on the
Meyrin main pole typical urban services as a post office, a bank or a travel agency.
Prévessin main pole is the second largest of the 17 poles that compose the CERN overall perimeter. It is 100% located on French territory. As opposed to the Meyrin main pole Prévessin
was primarily developed through 2 different phases. As such it is nowadays much more structured.
2.6.1 Population per building
Figure 7 and Figure 8 below shows the total number of people per building respectively in
Meyrin and Prévessin main poles according to the statistics of CERN Department of General
Service.
The representation of the number of people per building allows a clear distinction between the
different types of buildings already mentioned that make up CERN. The offices are dispersed
in different buildings. The areas with the highest density within Meyrin main pole are mainly
concentrated near the main entrance, in the vicinity of restaurant #2 and at the west end of the
site. Within Prévessin main pole, the population is mainly concentrated in 3 buildings. Large
buildings represented in grey below mainly include storage and maintenance spaces and include only few employees.
6
The Globe of Science and Innovation is an important symbolic element for CERN. It is, among other things, a
forum for discussions and exchanges on the interaction between science and society. It hosts exhibitions, lectures,
events, meetings and debates, which attract visitors. The Globe of Science and Innovation is a message for CERN
external people. As a metaphor of the earth, it is a symbol of sustainable development. It is located at the entrance of
Meyrin main pole, clearly visible from the access road.
Page | 25
Figure 7: Number of people per building in Meyrin
Page | 26
Figure 8: Number of people per building in Prévessin
Page | 27
2.6.2 Mobility attractors and generators
Within Meyrin main pole, there are several buildings that are the origin and destination of a
significant number of trips. These buildings are:
•
The Globe (B80): holds the exhibition “Universe of Particles”;
•
CERN main reception building (B33);
•
CERN professional reception building (B55);
•
Meyrin pole main building (B500);
•
Conference rooms which range in capacity from 20 up to 400 people;
•
3 hostels located within the Meyrin main pole with more than 550 people capacity;
•
A nursery (B662) and a kindergarten (B562);
•
More than 5 cafeterias and 2 restaurants (B500 and B504);
•
Services as a post office, a bank and a travel agency (B500).
The services, the main conference room and the main restaurant are all located within the
main building B500. It also hosts CERN general management team.
The building B33 hosts part of the financing and purchasing, human resources as well as the
physics department. This building also hosts CERN main reception which includes CERN gift
shop.
The three hotels are clustered south-east of Meyrin main pole with a total capacity of about
550 beds. In addition, CERN’s Saint-Genis-Pouilly Hostel Foyer Residence Schumann, situated on route D35, at the Northwest extremity of Meyrin pole, offers 151 beds. This hotel is
not inside the pole but only a few 100m away.
Within Prévessin main pole, the buildings that are the origin and destination of the largest
number of trips are:
•
The CERN Control Centre (B874);
•
The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) project: the satellite control room is hosted
in the AMS building (B946).
•
Restaurant (B866)
•
Building B774 which will be operational in 2014 and will include a large conference
room and reception facility.
Figure 9 and Figure 10 below locate the different buildings and mobility attractors and generators within Meyrin and Prévessin main pole.
Page | 28
Figure 9: Meyrin main pole mobility attractors and generators
Page | 29
Figure 10: Prévessin main pole mobility attractors and generators
Page | 30
2.7 Visiting CERN
CERN welcomes every year even more visitors who come to discover the largest particle
physics laboratory in the world. It welcomes the general public and organizes free of charge
guided tours from Monday to Saturday. Each tour lasts about 3 hours and includes an introduction, followed by a film and visits to experimental areas.
CERN also offers visitors the opportunity to visit two permanent exhibitions. “Universe of
Particles” is an exhibition installed in the Globe of Science and Innovation. Dedicated to
CERN main missions it allows visitors to explore the world of particles by immersing in a
unique ambiance. The second exhibition, “Microcosm”, is located close to CERN reception
and offers a discovery of CERN adventure and the secrets of matter.
Four themes (science, technology, innovation and international collaboration) are dealt with
visitors during the tours, which are organized in modules of 12 people with a guide for each
module. The guides are CERN staff members who dedicate part of their time to give a unique
experience to visitors. Educational and recreational spaces are installed at each point of interest to welcome the visitors. These points and their location within Meyrin and Prévessin main
poles are shown in Annex D.
In 2012 7, almost 98’000 people visited CERN with more than 63’000 entries to the exhibition
“Universe of Particles”. Schools represent about one third of these visitors. The demand is
such that CERN was forced to set up an online reservation system. Bookings are now taken
on a first-come, first-served basis. These numbers highlight the success of CERN in attracting
visitors from not only the neighbouring communities but also from Europe and the rest of the
world.
A shuttle service exists at CERN to move the visitors between the different interest points.
However, when visitors arrive in large groups with their own transportation mode which is
often a high-capacity bus, the bus is also used for the visit.
2.8 Regional and local planning and main future projects
As stated above, CERN is part of the FVG agglomeration. The agglomeration comprises a
vast area of 2,000 km² spread over the cantons of Geneva and Vaud, in the Swiss territory,
and the French departments of Ain and Haute-Savoie. It includes a total of 212 municipalities,
918’000 habitants and 440’000 jobs.
Between 2008 and 2010, the agglomeration project established the 8 PACA 8 perimeters,
shown below in Figure 11, which determine an important study programme, and identify the
7
Source : CERN (Visits Service – PH/EDU, database)
8
PACA : Périmètres d'aménagement coordonné d'agglomération (Coordinated land-use perimeters of
the agglomeration)
Page | 31
key sectors where planning operations should be carried out: strategic development projects
(PSD 9).
Figure 11: PACA perimeters
10
Two major planned development axes concern and contribute to the dynamics of the
CERN surrounding territory in terms of transport and urbanization.
•
Genève (CH) – Ferney (FR) – Gex (FR) and Cercle de l’Innovation (FR / CH):
The measures defined in this geographic cluster aim at improving, in a first stage, the
public transport and soft modes serving the Pays de Gex, linked with the densification
and reinforcement of the regional centres. In a second stage, the extension of the
tramway network will increase the capacity and attractiveness of the public transport
network.
•
Genève (CH) – Meyrin (CH) – St-Genis (FR) et Cercle de l'Innovation (FR): The
measures defined for this development axis have three complementary objectives: (1)
9
PSD: Projets Stratégiques de Développement
10
Page | 32
Source: Grand Genève: Agglomération franco-valdo-genevoise, 2013
a better use of the railway line “ligne de la Plaine”; (2) a gradual expansion of main
axes network in France and to Vernier; (3) improve permeability of soft modes. The
measures promote Saint-Genis-Pouilly as a regional centre in connection with the arrival of the tramway.
As of today there are a few planned projects having a direct impact on CERN operational mobility. These are:
•
Esplanade des Particules: Landmark public square located by CERN main entrance
and connecting CERN activities going on both sides of the route de Meyrin. This project is co-financed by the Geneva Canton which aims through this project at marking
one of the main entrance points into the Canton coming from France. The square is at
the crossroad of various transport modes (tram, bus, individual car, green mobility)
and could be considered as a mobility hub in the future.
•
Globe parking: As part of the Esplanade des Particules project a large parking facility
is being built next to the Globe opposite CERN main entrance. This large parking
(hosting about 400 parking spots) will be a key element in the mobility hub mentioned
above. More than 100 parking spots will be dedicated to Park and Ride.
•
CERN mobility plan: CERN is aiming at developing a short to mid-term mobility
strategy to help cope with the current mobility issues and reshape overall mobility to
and inside its sites. This strategy should be in place within 24 month.
Page | 33
3. Local transport network assessment
This chapter gives an overview of the transport network on CERN sites and its surroundings
using the functional approach of the VOLTair methodology. It focuses on transport infrastructure, planning and operation. For local transport network it focuses on the supply dedicated to
CERN users excepted visitors, who benefit from specific transport services.
The first part concentrates on the CERN accessibility from its surroundings by the different
modes of transport. For this purpose, an analysis of the road, public transport and soft modes
networks in the vicinity of the CERN overall perimeter is done.
The second part of the chapter focuses on the internal trips within the two main poles of Meyrin and Prévessin according to the different modes of transport.
Finally, the last part of the chapter details the transportation solutions already offered by
CERN to its users. This analysis highlights the strengths and weaknesses of the transportation
network in which the new automated transport system will be integrated.
3.1 Mobility habits of CERN users
The specificity of the CERN domain can be observed in the light of its users' mobility patterns. These mobility habits must be considered closely to better imagine how the local
transport network has been developed and how it is used. Although more details will be given
in part 5.1 "Preliminary demand estimation", it can be noticed that:
•
CERN perimeter is a restricted-user domain;
•
CERN's relative flexible working schedule allows for relatively well-spread traffic
flows;
•
Historical location and operational constraints leads to the individual cars to be the
primary transport mode.
3.2 Accessibility from outside CERN
3.2.1 Accessibility by road
The CERN perimeter is directly connected to the primary road network. Thus, long-distance
accessibility is possible from Switzerland and France via the A9 motorway and the D884/D35
highway. The connexion with the A9 motorway is provided by the Route of Meyrin (RC 06),
on which traffic speed can be impacted due to the tramway priority. A secondary road, Route
de l’Europe, links P1 – Meyrin and P2 – Prévessin poles directly, with low traffic constraints.
Figure 12 below illustrates the road access to the CERN site.
While the access to the Prévessin Pole is through one entrance only the Meyrin Pole has 5 different entrances.
Page | 34
Figure 12: Road network around CERN overall perimeter
Page | 35
3.2.2 Accessibility by public transport
The public transport that serves the CERN main poles of Meyrin and Prévessin is provided by
Transports publics genevois (TPG), the public transport operator responsible for the operation
of all transport modes in the canton of Geneva with the exception of train and boats, and by
the Chemins de fer fédéraux suisses (CFF), which operate the train services.
The CERN tramway station offers a good accessibility from Geneva to Meyrin main pole.
About 3’000 people have their offices in a radius of 500 meters around the station, which
means that they could theoretically easily access their office by foot. However, only about a
third of CERN users come from Switzerland, and not all of them live in zones accessible by
public transport. Even for those living close to the tramway, the buildings location within
Meyrin pole creates physical barriers that sometimes cannot be crossed easily. Finally, about
two-thirds of site users are located more than 500 metres from a public transportation stop.
The main public transport lines approaching CERN are described in Table 2 along with their
level of service.
Line
Frequency
Travel time
Served areas1
Tram 18
6/h.way
22' to
Genève-Cornavin
40% of Meyrin
26' to
Geneva Airport
40% of Meyrin
10' to
Meyrin-Gravière
0% of Prévessin
7' between
Zimeysa and GenèveCornavin
8’ between southern
gate and train stop by
bike
4/h.way (peak hour)
Bus Y
2/h.way (off-peak hour)
2/h.way (peak hour)
Bus O
1/h.way (off-peak hour)
RER
3/h.way
1
Walking catchment area: Bus 300m; Tramway 500m; RER 800 to 1’000m.
Table 2: Public transport network characteristics to access CERN main poles of Meyrin and
Prévessin
As a complement to the public transport network, CERN supplies 5 shuttle lines with small
vehicles (with a capacity of 13 or 21 people). These shuttles don't circulate all day and timetables are available on the CERN's website. More details will be given in part 3.4.1 "Shuttle
operations".
It can be noted that CERN's shuttle is connected to the public transport network and enhances
overall accessibility as follows:
•
A special shuttle links Meyrin's pole to the airport;
Page | 36
•
Access to Prévessin's pole is possible from CERN tramway terminus via shuttle circuits 2 and 6;
•
Last-mile issues, observed in Meyrin, are partly satisfied by shuttle circuit 1.
In general, it can be noticed that the public transport network is performing from the Swiss
railway network and Geneva city centre with the tram 18 which has a good frequency and is
comfortable. The situation is not the same on the other side of the border, where the public
transport network is more or less acceptable from Saint-Genis-Pouilly (FR) but with significant constraints in terms of available services and timetables, and almost non-existent for other parts of French surroundings. Figure 13 shows the different public transport routes around
the CERN overall perimeter.
3.2.3 Accessibility by soft modes
Walking is not an attractive option to access CERN main poles of Meyrin and Prévessin. Indeed, distances from these poles to the closest urbanised areas are more than 1 km (around 15’
of walk) and the quality of the walking paths is rather poor.
However, the geography of the zone shows an important potential for cycling accessibility. At
first, it can be noted that according to IN.S.T.A.L. census:
•
about 15% of Swiss residents live closer than 5 km from CERN site;
•
about 35% of French residents live closer than 5 km from CERN site.
Figure 14 below shows both walking and cycling network to access to CERN. It also shows
the "Passeport Big Bang" cycling itinerary that was developed by CERN to improve CERN’s
communication with its permanent and visiting community in terms of combining leisure, science and active transport modes.
3.2.4
Synthesis
Summarizing, multimodal accessibility to CERN main poles is contrasted:
•
Private motorized road transport is very attractive to access CERN main poles of Meyrin and Prévessin. However, the access roads are often saturated;
•
Public transport network is performing well from the Swiss railway network and Geneva city centre, acceptable from Saint-Genis-Pouilly (FR) but with significant constraints in terms of available services and timetables, and almost non-existent for other
parts of French surroundings;
•
It is possible to access the Meyrin main pole by public transport but access to Prévessin main pole requires a change at the tram terminus to use shuttle service which runs
at peak hours only;
•
The potential of cycling accessibility to CERN main poles is important and relatively
well developed. Missing links on the French side should be realized and access by bicycles within the CERN main poles should be improved.
Page | 37
Figure 13: Public transport network around CERN overall perimeter
Page | 38
Figure 14: Soft modes network to access CERN main poles
Page | 39
3.3 Trips internal to CERN’s domain
3.3.1 Road network
Inside CERN main poles, roads have been developed to meet operational needs. Depending
on road size, vehicles average speed and traffic flow, a road functional hierarchy could be developed (as shown below on Figure 15 and Figure 16 for Meyrin and Prévessin poles, respectively).
It can be noted that:
•
Internal road network is rather extensive. Indeed, buildings can often be joined by two
different roads with almost equal travel times. This means one of them could potentially be affected to other purpose;
•
Traffic flow map was estimated in Meyrin, based on counts at several locations within
the Meyrin main pole perimeter. IN.S.T.A.L study has shown that: the Meyrin occupancy by private vehicles rises within the morning peak (7:00-10:00), lowers again
during lunch time, rises again and gradually reduces during afternoon peak (16:0019:00); at lunch time, the restaurants R1 and R2 parking areas are saturated;
•
Regarding the entrances the study referred above observed that: entrance A presents a
low incoming traffic throughout the day, but a high peak during lunch time; high inand outgoing traffic are observed at Entrance B, particularly at noon due to lunch time
trips; and entrance E, which has limited times of operation, has shorter yet high peaks
during the morning and afternoon periods. Apart from the identified traffic congestion
at Meyrin main pole entrances, and at some car parking facilities, the traffic flow is
well distributed and remains low.
Page | 40
Figure 15: Meyrin main pole road network
Page | 41
Figure 16: Prévessin main pole road network
Page | 42
3.3.2 Shuttles operation
CERN currently provides 5 shuttle services to the employees and users. These services are
privately managed by CERN’s Department of General Services (GS). The shuttle circuits are
available from Monday to Friday (except CERN official holidays), free of charge and without
reservation. The following table (Table 3) describes and comments this additional mobility
supply:
Circuit
Exploitation
periods
Headway
[# veh/h.way]
Shuttle capacity
[# of seats]
1
8h – 9h,
17h – 18h
3
13
2
8h – 12h,
14h – 18h
1-2
13
23' between B500 and the
control centre (CCC)
4
8h – 19h
1-2
21
15' to airport (GVA)
6
8h – 10h,
12h – 14h,
16h – 19h
1-3
13
7' between B33 (Meyrin)
and control centre (CCC Prévessin)
7
5h – 8h30,
14h30 – 18h
3
13
Morning route: 55’ / 65’ /
70’ Afternoon route: 67’ /
32’ / 47’
Characteristic travel time
11' between B33 and B188
(all Meyrin's pole length)
Table 3: CERN's shuttle network characteristics
Figure 17 below depicts the different circuits of CERN’s shuttle network.
The comparison between the supply and the demand allow for estimating the shuttles occupancy. Data collected and analysed (Figure 18 and Table 4) show that occupancy varies between 20% and 70% depending on the shuttle circuit, which means between 3 and 9 people in
a 13-people capacity vehicle. In increasing order, the lowest occupancy service is circuit 1,
internal to Meyrin main pole. This low occupancy rate could be due to:
•
the lack of coordination with the tramway services;
•
the fact that lunch hours are not covered;
•
the fact that motorized vehicles are more competitive;
•
lack of communication towards the potential users;
•
the relatively short distances.
Therefore, one can assume that demand could be increased if the supply was more frequent, flexible and visible.
Page | 43
Figure 17: CERN's shuttle network
Page | 44
Figure 18: Description of CERN shuttles annual occupancy (source: CERN’s GS, 2012)
Circuit
Destination
Average annual occupancy
1
Meyrin's main pole tour
20 %
2
Meyrin's main building B500 – Hostels –
70%
Prévessin's control centre (CCC)
4
Meyrin's main building B500 –
airport (GVA)
6
CERN reception B33 (Meyrin main pole)
35%
– Prévessin main pole
Geneva
35%
Table 4: Annual occupancy of CERN shuttle services (source: CERN’s GS, 2012)
Circuits 4 and 6 show an average occupancy rate of 35%. This may be due to a well-spread
supply over the day and the fact that other transport alternatives are less competitive. For example: (1) parking in Geneva airport is restrictive; (2) travelling by car from Prévessin to
Meyrin for lunch can be restrictive due to parking saturation around restaurants; and (3) travelling from CERN tramway terminus to Prévessin (and return on late afternoon) can be more
natural for public transport users than entering Meyrin to pick up a CERN car.
The highest occupation shuttle service is on circuit 2, with about 70% of annual average occupation. Although it seems less attractive in terms of operation periods, frequency etc., it
links CERN’s Saint-Genis-Pouilly Hostel and the CERN main poles, and addresses the demand from a collective or soft modes "captive" population.
Page | 45
3.3.3 Soft modes network
No survey has been carried out to precisely map the use of soft modes inside of CERN main
poles. Yet, it is known that walking is highly disseminated in the south-east part of the Meyrin
main pole, where density is higher and building-to-building walking itineraries are possible
for regular CERN users. A significant amount of people also walks to the two restaurants
when weather conditions are favourable.
However, the following analysis of distances and travel time for soft modes inside both Meyrin and Prévessin poles, respectively Figure 19, Figure 20, Figure 21 and Figure 22 give a first
estimation of walking and cycling attractiveness. It is important to highlight that soft modes
have less "border effects" such as finding a parking place, walking to the car or waiting the
shuttle. They also allow for more direct itineraries, especially when it is possible to cross a
building.
It can be noted that CERN supplies semi-public bike possibilities (described in further details
in Annex G):
•
Bike sharing "Public Bike";
•
Bike rental.
This complementary supply is especially attractive for students and employees willing to circulate without a car inside CERN, but having no alternative choice.
Based on a census made in 2012, about 740 bike racks are provided on site.
Figure 19: Pedestrian travel times inside Meyrin
Page | 46
Figure 20: Bike travel times inside Meyrin
Figure 21: Pedestrian travel times inside Prévessin
Page | 47
Figure 22: Bike travel times inside Prévessin
The potential of soft modes use inside CERN main poles could be targeted by the implementation of comfortable and readable bicycle lanes and sidewalks, allowing quicker and direct
routes to intra-pole target destinations.
3.3.4 Summary of Trips internal to CERN domain
The analysis of the transport network that serves CERN two main poles of Meyrin and Prévessin allows drawing the following conclusions:
•
CERN collective transport supply is diversified and shows varied occupation depending on the supply attractiveness and users mobility;
•
Prévessin and Meyrin main CERN poles show a good potential for the spread of soft
modes usage, as distances are generally short.;
•
The potential of soft modes inside CERN could be encouraged by the provision of
more comfortable bicycle lanes and sidewalks, allowing more convenient, readable
and quicker trips;
•
It can also be noted that people who access CERN main poles by bicycle might be interested in collective transport modes, since work trips are not always compatible with
cycling due to the following reasons: (1) work suits and efforts; (2) group trips not
compatible with a single-user transport mode; and (3) need of carrying files, equipment or tools.
Page | 48
3.4 Range of solutions provided by CERN
CERN offers its users many transport possibilities that comprise bicycles, motorized vehicles
and collective transport modes. These possibilities are summarized in Table 5. For more details, a brief description of each of these modes is given in Annex G.
Motorized vehicles
CERN cars: traditional, gas and electric
900 vehicles
Car sharing
35 vehicles
Rental car – Taxi – Car Pool
Collective transport modes
On-demand shuttle
CERN shuttles: 5 routes
Bicycles
CERN bikes
1’000 bicycles
Public Bike
20 bicycles
Table 5: CERN official transport offer
.
Page | 49
4. Problems, Objectives and Expected impacts
This chapter firstly highlights the problems outlined by the territorial analysis. Then, it draws
the aim of the multimodal transport concept proposal, which could include innovative mobility solutions. Finally, it summarizes the expected impacts of the introduction of an automated
transport system.
4.1 Problems
The territorial analysis describes the territory that entails the CERN site, as well as the existing transport network and transport modes that are available to the CERN community (employees, users and visitors).
This contextual analysis has highlighted the CERN functional principles in terms of transport,
mainly influenced by the lack of accessibility by public transport from France, by the extent
of the CERN employees’ catchment area and by the policy of car use within both main poles.
Overall, the diagnosis of the CERN site has highlighted the following:
•
Important last mile issues inside Meyrin for PT users due to a favourable spatial configuration for private cars
•
Lack of connections between the main poles (Meyrin and Prévessin)
•
Unequal distribution of parking lots inside Meyrin, leading to important saturation issues near the main attractors and especially restaurants during lunch time
•
Shift work needs not covered by conventional means of transport, especially for users
carrying tools and equipment
•
Excessive speed observed along the internal road network
•
Lack of cycling paths
•
Lack of comfortable sidewalks
•
Lack of attractiveness of the supply and shuttle network
4.2 Objectives
The multimodal transport concept developed for the CERN site constitutes a long-term sustainable mobility approach that fosters, at different stages, the development of mobility solutions within the main CERN poles of Meyrin and Prévessin; the connections between both
poles and between these and the CERN outer-poles located both on French and Swiss territory. The tramway extensions, which will bring a better accessibility to the Meyrin main pole is
also part of the concept. Finally, it aims at supplying the best mobility services available to
meet specific and diverse demand.
Page | 50
One of the objectives is to demonstrate that an automated road transport system (ARTS) could
constitute a complementary service in the overall mobility package for the CERN community
which could improve the conditions and opportunities of mobility of the staff, users and visitors.
The system should also help reduce the pressure on parking areas. Indeed, the problem of
parking is considered as a key transport problem by users. The installation of an automated
transport system is thus perceived by CERN as an incentive to initiate a change in user behaviour that could eventually move part of the users away from personal motorized vehicles.
4.3 Expected impacts
Table 6 below compiles the potential identified impacts of the implementation of ARTS on
the CERN sites. These potential impacts will be addressed later in this report.
Evaluation areas
Evaluation category
Acceptance
Quality of service
Public transport system
Transport patterns
Social impacts
Environment
Environment
Financial impacts
Economy
Economic impacts
Impact
User acceptance
Willingness to pay
Information
Comfort
Safety and security
Modal change
System use
System performances
Spatial accessibility
Energy
Land take
Start-up costs
Operating costs
Revenues
Temporary jobs
Efficiency
Table 6: Expected impacts of the implementation of ARTS
Moreover, annex H includes a first evaluation, by an independent mobility expert, of the
CERN city study and the potential impacts of introducing ARTS on the CERN sites.
Page | 51
5. Multimodal concept and CERN potential sites
The spatial structure of the CERN site as a whole shows a strong hierarchy between the two
main poles (Meyrin, Prévessin) and the secondary poles distributed along the Large Hadron
Collider (LHC) ring. This functional hierarchy is reinforced by the fact that number of people
working at the secondary poles is much lower compare to the main CERN poles of Meyrin
and Prévessin.
Figure 23 : Illustration of the variety of trips between CERN poles
Based on the analysis of transport networks and the spatial structure of CERN, the following
part describes the multimodal concept elaborated for CERN. To develop this general multimodal concept, the larger scale has first been apprehended, looking for a long-term vision of
CERN mobility. Different deployment steps are foreseen towards this long-term general multimodal concept.
The first deployment step is the implementation of ARTS inside Meyrin's and/or Prévessin's
poles, these two possibilities are analysed into further details and are illustrated by "Phase 1
concepts". A pre-dimensioning is applied according to CTL suggested methodology, which
gathers all elements needed to operate a selection between the two poles in the next part.
5.1 General multimodal concept and deployment steps
Based on the analysis of present transport networks and the future mobility demand,
the multimodal mobility concept for CERN has been developed using as a combination of 3
different approaches, both dealing with access to CERN and trips inside CERN.
The three different approaches are described below:
Page | 52
1. "Public transport approach":
•
Access to CERN: the connexions with the public transport backbone network are improved: a link is created between the RER (railway express network) and Meyrin, with
a possibility to go further to Prévessin. The connexion with the airport, already offering a good level of service, is fully integrated. Also, the last-mile service from the two
future tramway stops is improved. In particular, accessibilities to the western part of
Meyrin and to Prévessin has been improved from the tramway stops, in order to attract
private car users to better performance and comfort;
•
Trips between poles: an improved service is offered. The ideal system being a building-to-building service (supply identical to CERN cars) or the creation of interfaces at
the poles entrances, between "local ARTS" and "higher-capacity cadenced ARTS". In
addition, ARTS is deployed inside each pole, for both visitors and collaborators interested for office-to-office or office-to-service centre trips.
2. "Circulation areas approach":
•
This approach concentrates on the liberation of circulation areas inside CERN main
poles for ARTS and soft modes. Considering that car drivers should be able to access
to all buildings from the main entrances and that the suppression of parking lots
should be minimal, a hierachization of road network is proposed inside the poles. The
result of this approach is visible in Figure 26 (Meyrin) and Figure 27 (Prévessin) for
Phase 1. An extension to the western part of Meyrin is foreseen in the future.
3. "Mobility hub"
•
This approach consists of creating “mobility hubs” at strategic locations of CERN
main poles. These interfaces perform efficient changes between cars and the inter-pole
or intra-pole ARTS systems. They should include authentication systems. In parallel,
if users' willingness and political support are high enough, this measure can be accompanied by a suppression of some strategic parking lots inside poles, liberating space
for new constructions or public spaces.
When superimposed, these three approaches allow all CERN users and staff to profit from the
different mobility services including ARTS and answer to an inclusive mobility demand for
all day long. All steps are to be satisfied with an excellent level of service from the arrival to
the departure. This is a necessary condition for users to change their mobility habits and to
switch from car to alternative combined modes: public transport + ARTS, bike + ARTS or car
+ ARTS.
Figure 24 below illustrates the long-term multimodal concept described above. This general
multimodal concept is foreseen on the long-term (post-2025) and could be achieved through a
progressive deployment that can be illustrated as shown on Figure 25.
Page | 53
Figure 24 : General multimodal concept for CERN for the long-term (post 2025)
Page | 54
Figure 25 : Proposal of phasing towards general multimodal concept
Page | 55
5.2 P1: Meyrin potential site
To develop Meyrin multimodal concept the following reasoning has been adopted:
•
Meyrin has 4 private car entrances, from which car drivers are able to access all buildings and parking lots, may it be by a longer route than the present one;
•
Shuttle services are already available and could be made more attractive through increased frequency or higher visibility. It is worth noting that regular shuttle services
are quite comparable to ARTS in terms of supply.
•
The tramway terminus and the Globe parking should be connected to the ARTS to
provide service to collaborators and visitors arriving by public transport;
•
The ARTS should serve the visit sites and the primary trip generators such as restaurants, services, Meyrin's hotel etc.
•
The number of intersections between ARTS and private vehicle should be minimal
and "light" solutions should be easy to find to manage them.
The concept, presented on Figure 26, is the result of a qualitative selection between multiple
schemes.
Figure 26 : Phase 1 concept for Meyrin
It is important to note that one track can satisfy multiple “lines of desire”. Indeed, depending
on the time of day, ARTS can satisfy:
Page | 56
•
Last-mile lines of desire from tramway to more-than-500m areas such as the southern
part of the pole and the "Restaurant 2". In a second phase, it could be interesting to extend the service toward the western part of Meyrin, if impacts on internal car traffic
are acceptable during peak hours;
•
Visits directly from Building 33 to all visit sites that aren't accessible by foot;
•
Office-to-office trips longer than 500 meters in an urban layout which is not always
inviting to walk (narrow pavements, fast vehicles, low animation, few vegetation etc.);
•
Office-to-restaurant trips
•
Connections between the tramway and the hostel.
5.2.1 Demand estimation
The demand of collaborators is evaluated between 875 and 980 trips per day inside Meyrin.
This amount is the sum of
:
•
635 - 700 trips corresponding to the 550 - 600 collaborators arriving by tramway and
who don't have a private vehicle (unless CERN cars or CERN bikes) during the day
for office-to-office nor office-to-restaurant trips and considering 3.5 trips per day and
70% of all trips done by foot;
•
240 - 280 trips corresponding to 5% of the actual trips made by car and that can be satisfied by the concept 11.
5.2.2 System pre-design
Based on CityMobil2 quantitative methodology, a first estimation of the necessary supply
would be the following 12:
•
Number of vehicles:
7 vehicles
•
Total vehicles kilometres travelled:
640 to 655 vehicles kilometres
•
Average commercial speed:
12 kilometres per hour
•
Occupancy rate:
710 passengers per kilometre
•
Minimum waiting time:
55 seconds
•
Maximum waiting time:
95 seconds
11
More details are given in Annex I.
12
The hypotheses and calculations are provided in Annex J.
Page | 57
In this pre-design, the necessary supply is higher by one unit than the 6 vehicles at disposal
for the demonstration. This could be addressed by integrating regular CERN shuttle in the
demonstration in order to have an attractive offer. Another possibility is to limit the demo
concept to the longer track, thus limiting the demand served by the line. The total demand being lower, the capacity of 6 vehicles will be sufficient.
5.3 P2: Prévessin potential site
During the first phase, transport modes to access Prévessin pole would not strongly evolve.
As CERN shuttles already circulate inside the pole, the last-mile demand can be considered as
mostly satisfied. The tourist visitors could profit from the ARTS, if their program includes
two or three destinations in the pole. Collaborators should be interested by office-to-office
and office-to-restaurant trips, especially those arriving without a private car.
The road network has been examined and multiple options have been generated. The proposed reorganisation of circulations guarantees access to all buildings and parking lots by car
with the exception for the western part of the pole, where a restricted access could be set up
for specific users. This road scheme allows creating a protected circulation area for ARTS and
cycles, serving visit sites and the restaurant.
Although the distances are compatible with walking, the local built environment is uncomfortable for pedestrians, except maybe during summer days. Hence, an important potential for
shuttle service.
Figure 27: Phase 1 concept for Prévessin
Page | 58
5.3.1 Demand estimation
The demand of collaborators is evaluated between 235 and 385 trips per day inside Prévessin.
This amount is the sum of:
•
The shuttles passengers between Meyrin and Prévessin (175 - 265 trips per day);
•
An estimated 5% of concurrence on private car due to the improvement of the CERN
service (60-120 trips per day) and/or for people who would access to Prévessin by car
but would prefer ARTS for on-site trips 13.
This demand would spread over working hours (office-to-office trips), with a peak around
noon (office-to-restaurant trips).
5.3.2 System pre-design
Based on CityMobil2 quantitative methodology, a first estimation of the necessary supply
would be the following 14:
•
Number of vehicles:
5 vehicles
•
Total vehicles kilometres travelled:
415 to 440 vehicles kilometres
•
Average commercial speed:
•
Occupancy rate:
7 to 8 passengers per kilometre
•
Minimum waiting time:
55 seconds
•
Maximum waiting time:
95 seconds
It can be noted that the supply of 5 vehicles seems enough to satisfy the 235 to 385 passengers
per day on a total 2.7 km tracks. However, the methodology based on multiplicative coefficients may reach its limits in this domain of application. Thus, the minimum and maximum
waiting time couldn't actually be reached, even with 5 vehicles.
13
More details are given in Annex I.
14
The hypotheses and calculations are provided in Annex J.
Page | 59
6. CERN intra pole site selection
In order to choose the most appropriate route for the demonstration, the following criteria
were taken into account:
•
The size of the demand: to ensure that the demonstration will have a real impact on
mobility, the number of vehicles should be in line with the demand.
•
The complementarity with other transport modes: the innovative vehicles must fit into
the overall concept of mobility and be complementary to existing mobility services.
•
The visibility of the system: to ensure that the demonstration will be a success, the vehicles must be visible to a maximum of potential users.
•
The agreement of the infrastructure service: the route chosen must allow the physical
integration of the vehicles ensuring safety for all users. The field constraints were
highlighted by the CERN infrastructure service.
•
The political will that is of upmost importance to support and defend a demonstration
within the CERN perimeter.
After evaluating all these criteria, the demonstration inside the Meyrin pole seems the most
promising. The idea of organizing a one-time event (2-3 days) during the 6 months of demonstration within the Prévessin pole is also considered.
Figure 28: Analysed demonstration routes
Page | 60
Within the CERN main pole of Meyrin, two routes have been considered. Both
shown on Figure 28.
routes
are
•
The first route (in blue) starting in the parking lot behind the building B33, takes the
Route Scherrer at front of the main building and then the Route Bloch towards restaurant R2. This route connects the Swiss part of Meyrin site to the French part.
•
The second route (in green) starting at the roundabout between the Route Pauli and
Route Démocrite, taking the Route Démocrite and then takes perpendicularly the
Route Rutherford to end at the restaurant R2.
The main constraint of the first route consists in not creating an east-west cutting effect that
splits the main pole of Meyrin into two separate units. A solution should therefore be found to
allow the crossings of innovative vehicles with regular traffic. This particular situation can
however be addressed using traffic regulation elements. Regarding the second route, access to
many parking lots couldn’t be guaranteed. The latest combined with shorter distance and lower visibility is considered to be a serious disadvantage.
As a consequence the first route is considered for demonstration as it offers a better visibility
and a combination of trip purposes: last-mile, building-to-building, special attractivity of services and restaurants etc. Moreover, this track is easily and progressively extensible towards
the Phase 1 of the General Multimodal Concept.
The potential demonstration track starts from Building 33 and heads to Restaurant 2.
It will be studied in greater details in the following chapter and deliverable 12.2.
6.1 Initial assessment
Pr. Yves Delacrétaz, Professor in mobility and transport at the engineering School of the
Vaud Region in Switzerland, has been asked to provide an independent evaluation of this report. His evaluation is to be found in annex H.
6.2 Initial practical feasibility analysis
6.2.1 Technical promptness
For operational reasons the potential demonstration route couldn’t be segregated from regular
road traffic. This means that as of day one the demonstration would run in mixed traffic
mode. As such it limits the flexibility and represents a potential risk to the demonstration success.
The choice of the possible route for the demonstration results of a close collaboration with the
CERN infrastructure service. In this context, it has been ensured that, with the help of some
specific one-off interventions, the innovative vehicles will be able to circulate on the selected
routes.
Page | 61
Finally, as CERN is currently running a traditional shuttle service, one could consider using
these instead of ARTS to meet the identified demand along the selected track. This could potentially significantly limit the financing need for a demonstration along this route.
6.2.2 Legal and Governance promptness
In Switzerland, the national legal framework for road mobility cannot be applied to automated
road systems. A process has been initiated with the authorities by the EPFL (CityMobil 2 –
WP3) to obtain a special authorization. Therefore, CERN didn’t duplicate the initiative.
Moreover, road traffic at CERN is regulated through an internal safety code (A7) which
makes both the Swiss and the French legislation applicable on the CERN sites. This safety
code is edited by the Director General. For specific activities or projects, the Director General
may decide to grant an exception to the national regulations for activities taking place on the
CERN domain. This could be the case for ARTS demonstration. Though, considering the risk
it represents outside of CERN core activity and the time scale of the demonstration no firm
commitment has been made by the Director General on this topic.
6.2.3 Economical promptness
Considering the current relatively fragile economic situation in most of CERN member states,
budgetary constraints are regularly imposed on non-core research activities. As such, at the
moment of writing, it’s not possible for CERN to make any commitment towards mid to long
term deployment of ARTS. Similarly, no budget could be earmarked for financing a Citymobil2 demonstration.
6.2.4 Population promptness
Although people traveling inside CERN are very attached to their cars, the idea of using occasionally an innovative automated vehicle inside the main pole of Meyrin makes its way. This
has been captured, for example, through the stated preference survey done in June 2013.
This being said, the technically savvy audience prevailing at CERN may also prove to be very
critical in case the technology would not be performing. This could potentially rapidly undermine the demonstration effort as the CERN community is very well connected.
6.2.5 Summary of the initial practical feasibility analysis
While the identified track makes sense on the demand and supply side, the timing for a large
scale demonstration seems to be remote. Strategic, economic and legal limitations, as exposed
above, are the primary reasons for this.
Nevertheless, the system dimensioning and demonstration proposal will be fully executed as
part of CERN city study. Even in the event the demonstration wouldn’t take place within
Citymobil2, the outcome of the CERN City Study will be solid elements to be considered
within CERN future mobility strategy.
Page | 62
7. Initial evaluation
The initial evaluation chapter presents the set of indicators that was chosen from a suggested
list and will capture the impacts that are associated with the implementation of the demonstration. The evaluation method of each one of these indicators is presented, and both reference
case and threshold of success are detailed. In total, 35 indicators, shown in the Table 7 below,
will be evaluated.
Category
Impact
User acceptance
Acceptance
Willingness to pay
Information
Comfort
Safety and security
Quality of service
System use
System performances
Social impacts
Spatial accessibility
Safety
Energy
Environment
Land take
Start-up costs
Financial impacts
Operating costs
Revenues
Temporary jobs
Efficiency
Economic impacts
Indicator
Usefulness
Reliability
User satisfaction with on demand service
Integration with other systems
User willingness
Availability
Comprehensibility
Perceived comfort
Perception of safety
System modal share
Total passenger.km travelled
Total n° of trips
Vehicle occupancy
Average journey time per OD pair
Journey time variability
Average waiting time
Effective system capacity
Change in range of key activities accessible
Incidents
Daily consumption
Energy efficiency
Change in road space availability to other users
Track construction and civil works
Vehicle acquisition / construction
Control systems and apparatus
Personnel
Vehicle maintenance
Track and civil infrastructures maintenance
Control system maintenance
Operating revenues
Jobs provided at the demonstration site
Financial Net Present Value
Socio-economic Net Present Value
Internal Rate of Return
Benefit / Cost Ratio
Table 7: Indicators to be measured to evaluate the impacts of the demonstration
The indicators highlighted in blue are those considered as core indicators by the project and
that are mandatory to be evaluated.
Page | 63
7.1 Measurement methods
The measurement methods could comprise: user interviews, the collection of system running
data and calculation of values which give the magnitude of the respective indicator.
Following the mentioned measurement methods are detailed.
7.1.1 User interview
The user interviews are mainly focused on measuring the impacts related to User Acceptance,
Willingness to pay, Information, Comfort and Safety and Security.
In total, eight indicators will be evaluated through a system users’ questionnaire that will be
addressed to the users of the system. These comprise: system usefulness, system reliability,
user satisfaction with on-demand service, user willingness to pay, information comprehensibility and availability, perceived comfort and perceived safety.
The system users’ questionnaire will be developed using a Likert-type scale 15 that evaluates
the answers in a scale from 1 to 5. The scale is therefore defined as:
Figure 29: Likert scale example
In order to have statistically significant results the sample-size should correspond to the expected tolerance and confidence interval. In this sense, a threshold of 200 valid responses 16 is
targeted as the minimum sample-size to evaluate the aforementioned indicators.
7.1.2 Data collection
7.1.2.1 System implementation
The implementation and integration of the system during the on-site demonstration, as defined
in Chapter 8, will enable to evaluate three indicators: integration with other systems; the
change in range of key activities accessible; and the change in road space availability to other
users, which measures the land-use impact of the proposed demonstration.
The integration with other systems will be measured in a scale that evaluates its potential of
integration.
15
A Likert scale is a psychometric scale that is frequently used in research that uses questionnaires
(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Likert_scale).
16
Page | 64
Valid responses comprise fully completed answers that address the indicators to be evaluated.
The range of activities that will be accessible by the system, which measures the spatial accessibility impact, is evaluated by the possibilities that are made available by the demonstration route chosen, from a supply radius associated to each station.
Finally, the change in road space availability to other users will be estimated through the
width of road that will be of system single-usage.
7.1.2.2 Vehicle and system logbooks
Through the vehicle technology, the following data can be recorded:
•
Speed profiles according to time and to the location of the vehicle in its route
•
Average and unitary vehicle energy consumption per day / per route
•
Number, type and location of emergency stops
•
Number, type and location of incidents
•
Boarding and alighting passengers at the different stations throughout the day
•
Time of arrival / time of departure to/from each station
The vehicles occupancy during the day or within target periods, and between each stop can be
collected if the system comprises either the presence of an operator inside the vehicle, or a
task of on-board vehicle data collection to be performed by the operator.
Furthermore, the initial evaluation to be performed during the on-site demonstration will have
to foresee alternative data collection methods in case the expected data to be retrieved by vehicle and system logbooks is not available.
7.1.2.3 Calculations
The data collected will provide the inputs that will allow the estimation of the indicators that
measure the following impacts: system use and performances and energy.
The vehicle and system logbooks data will enable to estimate the total km travelled, the average journey time per OD pair, the journey time variability, the average waiting time
and the effective system capacity, which correspond already to chosen indicators that measure system use and performances or will enable their calculation.
If the system’s implementation provides on-board data collection, the total passenger km
travelled, the total number of trips and the vehicle occupancy in each route segment can
also be estimated.
System modal share indicator is defined as a demonstration goal, and corresponds to the percentage of all trips that are targeted by the demonstration.
The energy impacts will be measured through the daily consumption and energy efficiency.
Both indicators will be estimated through the data collected by the vehicle technology.
Page | 65
7.2 Reference case and success threshold
The reference case sets the start-up threshold of each one of the indicators chosen to address
the initial evaluation. The definition of the reference case is based, as much as possible, on the
shuttle service which is already provided by the CERN internal transport solutions. Although
the demonstration of the ARTS system is not intended to replace any of the existing shuttle
circuits, certain characteristics of the service provided are suitable for the purposes of the reference case definition. However, there are still indicators for which no reference exists, and
therefore they are estimated on a theoretical basis. This is mainly the case related to the indicators measuring the system use and performances and the social impacts.
The threshold for success sets up the target value that is aimed at. The aimed target values are
the reference for the ex-ante evaluation and will allow accessing the rate of success of the
demonstration of the ARTS system.
The reference case and threshold for success are detailed by evaluation category.
7.2.1 Indicators evaluating User’s Acceptance
Table 8 shows the indicators that are assessed through the users’ questionnaire. The question
type, reference case and threshold for success are hereby defined.
The demonstration aims to reach at least 50% of the agreement responses, i.e., 50% of the respondents that either agree or strongly agree with the respective sentence (related to the
measurement of the respective indicator), or that more than 50% of the respondents recognise
a price to pay for the ARTS service.
Indicator
Usefulness
Reliability
User satisfaction
with on-demand service
User willingness to
pay
Question type
“ I find the service provided by the
new ARTS system very useful”
“ The new ARTS system works very
well”
“The on-demand service is very useful to provide a transport solution to
CERN community”
“How much would you agree to pay
for one ride?”
Possible answers: (1) 0 € / (2) <= 1€ /
(3) 1€ to 3€ / (4) 3€ to 5€ / (5) >5€
Reference
case
Threshold for success
NA
>= 50%
NA
>= 50%
NA
>= 50%
NA
>= 50% respondents
choose options (2) to
(5)
Table 8: Indicators evaluating User's Acceptance (1)
The integration with other systems indicator is measured using the following hierarchical
scale, which is evaluated if it is potentially integrated with other transport systems or not, and
if so, with each type of transport mode:
•
0 – No potential;
•
1 – Potential of one change with P&R facility, potential of one change with traditional
public transports, potential of one change with soft mobility modes,
Page | 66
•
2 – Potential of one change with other innovative transport modes. In this sense, the
hierarchy of the options provides the measure of the indicator.
Indicator
Integration with other systems
Reference case
NA
>1
Table 9: Indicators evaluating User's Acceptance (2)
7.2.2 Indicators evaluating Quality of Service
Following in Table 10, the question type, reference case and threshold for success of quality
of service indicators measured through the users’ questionnaire are detailed.
The threshold for success targets at least 50% of responses towards: a positive agreement with
the sentence proposed; the comfortable overall perception and feel safe inside of the vehicle.
CERN’s ambition is to provide a quality ARTS service that will not only provides a useful
and comfortable transport solution to add at the overall solutions that are implemented within
its perimeter, but is also an adapted service to the highly technology orientated community
and its visitors.
Indicator
Question type
Information availability
“I can access to ARTS system information
as timetable, stops location, routes…”
“I can easily understand what the ARTS
new system is, where I can board, and
which destinations I can reach.”
“How comfortable do you feel inside of the
ARTS vehicle?”
Possible answers: (1) Not comfortable at all
/ (2) A little uncomfortable / (3) Neither
comfortable or uncomfortable / (4) Comfortable / (5) Extremely comfortable
“How secure do you feel while travelling in
the ARTS vehicle?”
Possible answers: (1) Extremely scared /
(2) Scared / (3) OK / (4) Safe / (5) Extremely safe
Information comprehensibility
Perceived comfort
Perception of safety
Reference
case
Threshold
for success
NA
>= 50%
NA
>= 50%
NA
>= 50% responses
choose options (4) to (5)
NA
>= 50% of
responses
choose options (3) to (5)
Table 10: Indicators evaluating Quality of Service (1)
Taking into account the CERN shuttles routes and available data, the reference case for the
remaining considered system use and performance indicators is based on CERN shuttle circuit
1, which runs inside the main pole of Meyrin.
Page | 67
The characteristics of the CERN Shuttle service circuit 1 17 are as follows:
Number of vehicles
Number of seats
Vehicle average speed
Route round-trip length
Frequency
Exploitation periods
Number of possible rotations per day
Vehicle occupancy per trip [pax/trip]
Average vehicle occupation
Average of passengers per day [pax/day]
1
13
20 [km/h]
5 [km]
20’
8h – 9h30 / 12h – 14 /
17 – 18h30
13
4
26%
44
Table 11: Shuttle service circuit 1 characteristics
The calculations of the reference case for system modal share, total passenger.km travelled,
effective system capacity, total number of trips and average waiting time is shown below:
System modal share: The system modal share is based on the results of the IN.S.T.A.L. study
[9], which stipulates that 2,5% CERN users chose to use the available shuttle services provided by CERN. We will assume that this modal share for the shuttle service Circuit 1 as well.
The aim of the demonstration is to, at least, double the present modal share.
Effective system capacity = 13 [shuttles/day] * 5 [km] * 13 [pax/shuttle] = 845 [pax.km/day]
Total passenger kilometre travelled = 845 [pax.km/day] * 26% = 220 [pax.km/day]
Number of trips = 220 [trips/day]
Average waiting time = Frequency/2 = 10 [minute]
Regarding vehicle occupancy, it is important to highlight that the reference case is based on a
single shuttle vehicle of 13 seats, that runs 13 times per day, 5 days per week. The demonstration proposes a service of 60 seats of capacity per shuttle, with a higher frequency per day,
which makes the threshold of success of this indicator to be lower than that of the reference
case.
Concerning these indicators, the demonstration will be considered successful if, at least, the
system transport offers as much capacity and as many passengers are carried as with the traditional circuit 1 shuttle.
The sum-up details of both reference case and threshold for success for system use and performances indicators based on CERN shuttle service Circuit 1 is shown below in Table 12.
17
Page | 68
Source : GS, CERN (2012)
Indicator
System modal share
Total passenger.km travelled [pax.km/day]
Total number of trips
Vehicle occupancy [%]
Average journey time per OD pair [minutes]
Journey time variability [minutes]
Average waiting time [minutes]
Effective system capacity [pax.km/day]
Reference case
2.5 %
220
220
26 %
1.5
NA
10
845
>= 5 %
>= 220
>= 220
< 10 %
< 1.5
<5
< 10
>= 845
Table 12: Indicators evaluating Quality of Service (2)
7.2.3 Indicators evaluating Social Impacts
The social impacts are measured through two indicators: the change in range of key activities
accessible and the number of incidents. In what concerns the change in range of key activities,
the demonstration targets at least one new activity is made accessible by the ARTS system to
one person over 10 potential daily users.
The incidents demonstration goal indicator is defined attending to a target level of 90% of
successful vehicle rotations. This means that it is aimed to have less than 10% of incidents
caused by mechanical failures or traffic incidents.
Table 13 below, shows their respective reference case and threshold for success, which correspond to targeted goals of the demonstration.
Indicator
Reference case
Change in range of key activities accessible
NA
Incidents
NA
1 new activity is accessed by 10% of potential daily users
< 10 incidents / day
Table 13: Indicators evaluating Social Impacts
7.2.4 Indicators evaluating Environment
The daily consumption and energy efficiency indicators, which measure the energy impacts,
are based on the unitary consumption and on the vehicles mileage.
It is assumed that a unitary consumption is of 0.17 [kWh/pax.km] 18. In this sense:
Energy efficiency = 0.2 [kWh/pax.km]
Daily consumption = 0.2 [kWh/pax.km] * 220 [pax.km/day] = 44 [kWh/day]
In what relates the change in road space availability to other road users, that measures land
take impact, if road space for ARTS system demonstration implementation is not concurrent
18
Page | 69
CyberMove, D2.3b & D4.3 « Ex-Post evaluation report », p.66.
with the space already available to soft modes, or if its implementation favours soft modes
available road space, then it qualifies as a threshold for success.
Indicator
Daily consumption [kWh/pax.km]
Energy efficiency [kWh/day]
Reference case
44
0.2
Change in road space availability for other
users
NA
<= 44
<= 0.2
ARTS system needed
road space does not interfere or favours soft
modes
Table 14: Indicators evaluating Environment
7.2.5 Indicators evaluating Financial Impacts
No reference case and threshold for success are defined in this chapter regarding indicators
evaluating financial impacts. The costs of the demonstration will be estimated in the financial
proposal of the second deliverable based on the integration project and on the system sizing.
The only information that can be given concerns the operating revenues that will be zero since
the demonstration will be free of charge for all users.
Indicator
Track construction and civil works
Vehicle acquisition / construction
Control systems and apparatus
Personnel
Vehicle maintenance
Track and civil infrastructure maintenance
Control system maintenance
Operating revenues
Reference case
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0
Table 15: Indicators evaluating Financial Impacts
7.2.6 Indicators evaluating Economic Impacts
In the reference case, 1 operator in each vehicle is considered to ensure the security of the system. An additional person is situated within the general command centre to monitor the functioning of the entire system. The ultimate goal is however to maintain only two persons in the
command centre to ensure a permanent control even if one of the two operators should intervene on one vehicle. The vehicles operate autonomously without any operator on board. This
goal is considered as the threshold for success.
Concerning the other economic indicators, no reference case is calculated. The net present
values are supposed to be positive and the benefit over cost ratio positive at a 15 years’ time
horizon.
Page | 70
Indicator
Jobs provided at the demonstration site
Financial Net Present Value
Socio-economic Net Present Value
Internal Rate of Return
Benefit / Cost Ratio
Reference case
1 operator per vehicle +
1 person in the command
centre
NA
NA
NA
NA
2 persons in the command centre
>0
>0
NA
>1
Table 16: Indicators evaluating Economic Impacts
Page | 71
8. System dimensioning
The track (also called the line) for the ARTS being chosen, the following part defines stops
and analyses the demand served by the line and the origin-destination pairs. Based on several
hypotheses, the foreseen demand is shown on different links of the line. The capacity of the
automated system is then evaluated. A sensitivity analysis is also performed. This allows confronting supply and demand in order to choose the exploitation concept, which will then be
integrated in the CERN's urban context.
8.1 Demand analysis
8.1.1 Description of the line, stops and catchment areas
In order to estimate the demand more precisely than in the pre-dimensioning, the precise route
and the stops have to be clearly identified. Each stop has a catchment area, gathering a certain
number of people and including attractors/generators: the tramway terminus, services, restaurants, hostel etc. Thanks to an estimation of the number of people per building, the attractivity
of each catchment area has been evaluated and can be seen below.
Figure 30 : Estimation of daily number of trips by private car inside Meyrin
Page | 72
This line includes four links of various lengths:
•
link 1: between "33" and "500" - 180 meters;
•
link 2: between "500" and "Hotel" – 160 meters;
•
link 3: between "Hotel and "PS area" – 440 meters;
•
link 4: between "PS area" and "Restaurant 2" – 330 meters.
8.1.2 Variations of mobility patterns depending on the period of day
Demand varies depending on the time of the day. Thus, three representative periods have been
examined:
•
the "morning peak-hour" (MPH), between 7:30am and 9:30am;
•
the "lunch time representative hour", between 12:00 and 13:30am;
•
the "late afternoon peak-hour", between 5:00pm and 7:00pm.
For practical reasons of comparability, the following parts only consider representative hours
amongst these periods.
Mobility patterns vary significantly between these periods. To closely estimate demand for
each period, the following trips have been considered:
•
during the "morning peak-hour" :
o last-mile from the tramway terminus, with "peaked" arrivals every 10 minutes;
o last-mile from the building 500 : with a diffuse demand, it corresponds to people arriving by car to the eastern big parking lots, entering the building to use
the services and then wanting to reach their office;
o last-mile from the hostel : with a diffuse demand, it corresponds to people staying at the hostel and reaching their office.
•
during the "lunch-time representative hour" :
o people heading for one restaurant or the other : this demand has been considered as constant ;
o people coming back from both restaurants (inverse flow);
o building-to-building homogeneous flow;
o last-mile to the tramway terminus : this demand is peaked for the arrivals and
diffuse for the departures (people heading for the tram).
•
during the "late afternoon peak-hour" :
Page | 73
o inverse last-mile to the tramway : with a diffuse demand, this flow is the inverse that in the morning peak-hour, but is a bit lower due to wider spread
over the afternoon;
o building-to-building homogeneous demand.
8.1.3 Origin-destination pairs and cumulative demand on each link
The best way to estimate and show the demand in sufficient details is to use origin-destination
pairs. An important hypothesis allows simplifying this description of the demand. As shown
on the following figure, the automated system becomes attractive for trips of more than one
link. The waiting time is the primary cause for this.
As a conclusion, it is assumed that one-stop trips are more competitive by foot and will
not be considered in the following analysis. However, since the waiting times would not
exceed 3'-4', the ARTS would be competitive as of 2-stops trips.
Figure 31 : Comparison of travel times between walking and the automated system
Page | 74
Several assumptions have been made to estimate the total demand for each origin-destination
pair (see Annex K), its modal distribution and the catchable part for each mode. The following Figures 40, 41 and 42 describes the results for each representative period.
Figure 32 : Demand characterization for the "morning peak-hour"
Page | 75
Figure 33 : Demand characterization for the " lunch-time representative hour"
Page | 76
Figure 34 : Demand characterization for the "late afternoon peak-hour"
Page | 77
8.2 Supply dimensioning
The description of the supply includes the calculation of the capacity of the line depending on
several factors described hereafter. But to verify if the supply tightly satisfies the demand, the
operating concept must be described precisely.
8.2.1 Capacity of the automated system and comparison with demand
The following paragraphs develop a simple and robust way to estimate the automated system
capacity. To do so, the input data are described in the following table.
Table 17: Hypotheses and input data
The results of the calculation are described in the following table. It is important to mention
that a sensitivity analysis has been done on the following parameters:
•
the number of stops, whether 8 (all stops) or 5 (stops for one way only and direct return);
•
the average circulation speed, whether 10, 12, 15 or 18 km/h;
•
the number of vehicles, whether 4, 5 or 6 vehicles.
Page | 78
Table 18: Calculation of the automated system capacity
The results show that the total capacity of the system, in the "normal conditions" of 15 km/h
and 8 stops, reaches:
•
165 people per hour per way with 4 vehicles;
•
210 people per hour per way with 5 vehicles;
•
250 people per hour per way with 6 vehicles.
As one can see, the supply is sufficient to satisfy the demand, with a number of vehicles
adapted to the representative period. The following graphs show that:
•
during the “morning peak-hour”: 4 vehicles are sufficient to satisfy the last-mile arrivals, with little margin. On the inverse way, the demand should be very negligible;
•
during the "lunch-time representative hour": 6 vehicles are needed;
•
during the "late afternoon peak-hour": 4 vehicles are needed, with so little margin that
a 5-vehicles supply would be preferable.
Page | 79
Figure 35 : Demand loads per link – Morning peak-hour
Figure 36 : Demand loads per link – Lunch-time representative hour
Page | 80
Figure 37 : Demand loads per link – Late afternoon peak-hour
Once the number of vehicles is known, several operating schemes will be described, and an
optimal one will be attributed to every representative period.
8.2.2 Exploitation concept
8.2.2.1 Morning peak-hour operating concept
The interest of this period is that it combines a "peaked" demand from the tramway terminus
to a "diffuse" demand from building 500 and the hostel. Thus, the supply must be studied with
precision to fit the different kinds of demand, in order to minimize waiting times.
As an introduction, it should be reminded that it is assumed that a minimum of 20 people will
be arriving from the tramway stop every 10 minutes. Though two vehicles would be sufficient
for these commuters in average, it can be foreseen that some tramway arrivals are more important than other. Also, since the total trip duration (round trip) is about 15 minutes, it is impossible for a vehicle to satisfy the last-mile demand and to come back before the next tramway arrives.
Thus, in order to optimize the level of comfort, a 6-vehicle supply is recommended. The best
scenario for them is that automated vehicles are ready at the "33" stop for them to get on
board. The automated vehicle should adopt a 10 minutes frequency as well.
Page | 81
As for the diffuse demand, a 10 minutes period creates rather long waiting times, with an average waiting time of 5 minutes and a maximum waiting time of 10 minutes. For them, a
higher frequency would be preferable.
Two operating concepts are shown below, each one adapting to a kind of demand, either
peaked or diffuse.
Figure 38 : Operating scheme for the morning peak-hour – "Three synchronous duets"
Figure 39 : Operating scheme for the morning peak-hour – "6-vehicle regular-interval service"
Page | 82
Several arguments can be discussed to choose the operating concept:
•
for the diffuse demand, the "regular-interval service" would be more appropriate. Even
tramway commuters would be well satisfied, with only 2'30'' of maximum waiting
time;
•
however, the peaked demand is larger than the diffuse demand. Especially, commuters
arriving from the tramway appear as a more sensitive demand than the hostel users.
Thus, it would be preferable to orientate the supply towards them with the "three synchronous duets" operating concept;
•
also, since volumes of private cars traffic are more important during morning peakhour, the "three synchronous duets" operating concept would be more interesting because it allows a lower number of conflicts;
•
finally, in the perspective of developing the ARTS in general, it seems more interesting to try and optimize a coordinated timetable operating concept.
During the morning peak-hour, a 6-vehicle supply is recommended in coordination
with the tramway arrivals, according to the "three synchronous duets" operating concept.
8.2.2.2 Lunch-time operating concept
The demand is spatially homogeneous, temporarily diffuse and requires a 6-vehicles supply.
During the lunch-time period, the operating concept is naturally oriented toward the
"6-vehicles regular internal service"
8.2.2.3 Afternoon peak-hour operating concept
Demand is oriented in majority towards the 500 and the 33 buildings, with a rather diffuse
temporality. It requires a 5-vehicles supply. A regular internal service would provide with a
3 minutes frequency, which is very attractive.
During the afternoon peak-hour, a 5-vehicles regular internal service is recommended.
8.2.2.4 Off-peak operating concept
Demand is difficult to estimate during off-peak periods. The supply would depend on operating constraints such as the battery charging time etc.
Page | 83
During off-peak hours, a 3-to-4-vehicles supply is recommended, with a regular internal
service concept. If possible during the demonstration, the operating concept should be
switched to "on-request".
8.2.3 Conclusion and suggested improvement
The system dimensioning can be summarized as follows:
1. the demand evolves during the various representative periods, and several operating concepts
are to be developed in order to fit with the demand;
2. the following operating schemes are recommended for each period :
Figure 40 : Daily evolution of operating schemes
3. with the proposed supply, the level of service should be very attractive for CERN's users,
efficiently helping the last-mile problematic and parking congestion around restaurants;
4. the urban integration should take into account that :
•
•
•
crossings should be possible all along the track;
a stock of 2 vehicles should be possible at all stops to allow flexibility of the exploitation;
conflicts with private cars should be handled so as to limit the time loss to 1'30'' (as
considered in the dimensioning with the 3 incidents of 30'' each).
Page | 84
The following improvements are suggested for the last months of the demonstration:
•
the extension towards the western part of Meyrin's site, where an important number of
commuters could be satisfied. Yet, the round trip would be longer, degrading the supply. This extension could be tested but the best case would be to do it with additional
vehicles;
•
the creation of an ARTS stop in front of building 33, which would offer a more direct
connection for tramway commuters but would imply circulating on the public domain
with the related legal complications.
Page | 85
9. Urban integration
9.1 Sharing the road
For operational reasons a large scale demonstration could only take place on a mixed use road
with no segregation from traditional vehicles with driver. While this represents a potential risk
to the demonstration success it can also be considered as an opportunity to make a step towards the deployment of automated road transport systems.
9.2 Vehicle characteristics
The precise characteristics of Robosoft vehicle being not known, the integration is carried out
on the basis of Induct manufacturers’ data. A minimum width of 3 meters per direction is considered to take into account the width of the vehicle (2.10 meters) and safety margins. The
vehicles are supposed to be moving at 15 km/h and the stops will be done on the road and not
on the side of it.
9.3 Maintenance depot and control station
The maintenance depot and the control station will be installed in a temporary tent located in
the immediate vicinity of the automated vehicles route. Two locations have been identified as
suitable and are shown in Figure 41 and Figure 43.
The advantages and disadvantages of each location are the following:
Location 1: Parking lot at the rear of building 33
Advantages
Disadvantages




Stabilized ground
Visibility for the installation of information boards
Easy movement of vehicles to recharge during the day
Requires removing parking spaces
Location 2: Intersection between Bakker and Bloch roads
Advantages

Central location for operator interventions on vehicles
Disadvantages



Slightly sloping ground
Necessary stabilization of the ground covered with grass
Reduced visibility
The first location is considered more advantageous as it allows combining the two purposes of
technical maintenance and information. In addition, the installation of the tent requires the
minimum of civil works.
Page | 86
9.4 The route
The route begins at the rear of building 33, i.e. the reception, in front of the Van Hove square
which displays famous scientific equipment. The station is located in the parking lot which is
redesigned to limit the number of potential points of conflict with traditional vehicles. The
circulation space of automated vehicles is segregated from that of conventional vehicles by
barriers (cf. Figure 41).
This reconfiguration requires the removal of 50 parking spaces and the shift of the exit driveway of the parking eastward. In addition, this solution allows creating a safe pedestrian path
between the reception (B33) and the main building (B500).
At the exit of the parking lot, a traffic sign prohibiting right turns is installed. This will encourage CERN users to use the Bohn road and thus to reduce the traffic on the Scherrer road
in front of the main building.
Figure 41: Integration plan – “33” station
STOPS traffic signs and flashing lights informing on the presence of automated vehicles are
installed throughout the route at all crossings. This includes crossings with other roads as well
as parking exits.
At the entrance of the main building, the road configuration is not adequate to position two
stations facing each other. While the station in the direction of building 33 is positioned in
Page | 87
front of the main building entrance, the station in the direction of the restaurant is shifted
south in front of the building 510. A crosswalk already enables secure pedestrian crossing (cf.
Figure 42).
Figure 42: Integration plan - "500" station
The intersection between the roads Marie Curie, Bloch, Scherrer and Bakker is the one that
requires the utmost attention to ensure the safety and the priority of automated vehicles. This
crossing is currently composed by a double loss of priority resulting in a T-junction and a
roundabout.
The double intersection will be secured using traffic lights as shown on Figure 43. To improve traffic flow, these traffic lights will turn red only when they detect the approach of an
automated vehicle. The rest of the time, the traffic lights will be off. The installation requires
the implementation of an advanced signal for the communication between the traffic lights
and the automated vehicles.
The intersection is transformed into two priority lanes and two presets for vehicles turning left
so that it is no longer seen as a roundabout. “Crossroads modified” panels should also be added to warn CERN users.
Page | 88
Figure 43: Integration plan - "Hotel" station
As noted above, the grassy area between the roads Bakker and Bloch can be used as an alternative to establish the maintenance depot.
The route then takes the Weisskopf road that is located along the fence. This road presents
thus the advantage of having only few potential points of conflict but requires a reconfiguration for the implementation of a station. This issue is discussed in detail in the section below
entitled “Stations”.
The route ends at the restaurant #2. The reverse loop is facilitated by the presence of a roundabout that will be secured by traffic lights. To reach the 504 building (the restaurant) pedestrians have to cross the parking lot. Additional measures can be taken to facilitate this last link.
Page | 89
Figure 44: Integration plan - "Restaurant 2" station
9.5 Stations
The stations are designed to accommodate simultaneously two vehicles in order to be consistent with the duets operating concept. This implies a station length of approximately 7 meters. The length of the stations may be increased up to 10 metres if necessary, thanks to the
available roadside space.
Each station consists of:
•
A 2 meters wide platform
•
A totem indicating the location of the station
•
An information board to communicate on the route and on the headway of the shuttles
•
A lumbar support device
The departure station at the rear of building 33 should be particularly attractive to arouse the
curiosity of potential users.
The only station that requires infrastructural work is that located on the road Weisskopf. The
current road width must be reduced in order to install a two meters wide platform for the station.
Page | 90
This change requires the following accompanying measures:
•
Horizontal marking to delimitate the narrowing of the road
•
Central horizontal marking to delimitate the traffic lanes
•
Bollards to protect the stations from vehicles and to visually indicate the traffic lanes
shift
Figure 45: Integration plan - "PS area" station
Figure 46 helps to account for the proposed development of the station.
Figure 46: "PS area" station
Page | 91
If the experiment is successful and appreciated by the users, the layout of the stations may
serve as an example to refurbish all shuttle stops within Meyrin and Prévessin main poles in
order to achieve homogeneity and to ease the readability of the overall transport system.
9.6 Marking
A special horizontal marking will be drawn along the line to visually delimitate the road sections that will be used by the automated vehicles. This will attract the attention of users in the
presence of the innovative transport system. The marking will be accompanied by bollards at
locations where illegal parking of private cars needs to be prevented to ensure that badlyparked vehicles do not represent impassable obstacles for automated vehicles. Vertical signage panels will also be added at each site entrance as well as at key locations along the line to
warn road users that an experiment is currently in progress.
Figure 47: Vertical signage
Finally, to give a playful aspect to the system, logos will be drawn on the ground at regular
intervals using stencils. Three designs are proposed below.
Figure 48: Horizontal signage
Page | 92
9.7 Accompanying measures
To improve traffic conditions and safety on the site during the demonstration, the difference
between the speeds of traditional and automated vehicles should be reduced, especially on the
sinuous part of the route around the main building. A maximum speed of 30 km/h is therefore
recommended all along the automated vehicles route.
In addition, the Weisskopf road is straight and wide over a length of about 500 meters. This
configuration encourages vehicles to drive at high speed, even if the road is restricted to a low
speed. The installation of the station in the middle of the straight line will help to slow the vehicles that will need to be attentive to pedestrians. Other occasional narrowing of the road can
also be installed to complete the slowdown infrastructure.
Page | 93
10. Citizen Awareness
10.1 Citizen awareness campaign context
By its core activity CERN is a center for research and development. As such most of CERN
community is very open and sensible to any related activities. At the same time this community is highly technically savvy and thus very demanding on all kind of research projects.
Moreover, the CERN community from all over the world is very well connected through different communication channels. A few of these are:
•
Social network
•
CERN website
•
CERN weekly bulletin
•
on-site service centers hosting information and communication stands
•
emailing
Hence, communication and information strategy aiming at increasing citizen awareness has to
be cautiously prepared and implemented.
Regarding the mobility context, CERN is currently working at developing a CERN mobility
strategy. As CERN users’ mobility has a direct impact on their operational efficiency it is
considered CERN obligation to provide users the most efficient mobility solutions. Any constraints imposed are perceived very negatively and faces strong opposition which rapidly
leads to rejection.
More specifically, through the ongoing mobility strategy definition, one issue currently stands
out and relates to the lack of parking and the inefficient management of parking areas. Other
mobility issues are therefore much less under the spotlight. One could even say that most of
the on-site users’ attention regarding mobility crystalizes on the parking issue. The introduction of automated transport system could therefore be seen by many as out of context not addressing the right issues.
10.2 Citizen awareness campaign aim and objectives
The citizen awareness campaign should aim at demonstrating the potential of ARTS as part of
an integrated multimodal mobility concept to meet specific demand and help improve mobility overall on site and between sites. All positive impacts that ARTS could have on the parking
management on site should be communicated.
Also the environmentally friendliness of electric ARTS should be put forward as it is in line
with the sustainable development promoted by CERN.
Page | 94
Moreover the introduction of ARTS should be presented as one of the many actions to be
tested with the aim of addressing mobility issues on site. The concept of experiment very
much resonates inside the CERN community and this should be leveraged.
10.3 Target population segmentation and baseline evaluation
The target population should be CERN users including staff, physicists or students. This target group accounts for approximately 8000 people, coming on site on a daily basis.
The baseline evaluation will be performed through conducting the same survey of similar
group before and after the demonstration and citizen awareness campaign.
It is also considered to lead tourist visitors to experience ARTS mobility as part of the CERN
experience. The total number of visitors is about 100.000. Assuming about 15% would get the
ARTS experience included in their visit it represents 15.000 people being exposed to ARTS.
10.4 Stakeholders and political support
CERN senior management support will most probably remain as long as the demonstration
proves to be effectively addressing CERN mobility issues. Collective opposition and overall
failure of the demonstration will lead to disinterest from the CERN user community and the
management. On the contrary collective enthusiasm and snowball effect will increase management interest in the concept and could potentially lead to a deployment strategy to be developed.
10.5 Social Marketing mix
10.5.1 Product or Social Idea
The demonstration route is passing through the most highly occupied areas on the CERN site.
It is also the area in which external visitors are present. Moreover it connects highly populated
area with service centers. If the service proves to be efficient it will be relatively easy to encourage people to try and use it.
10.5.2 Price
As all mobility services at CERN are free, ARTS will be similarly offered for free as part of
the multimodal mobility offer.
10.5.3 Place, Promotion and People
Promotion of the service will be done at the CERN tram stop, main P+R parking at CERN
entrance and at the 2 main service centers. Promotion will also be done via email to people
located in buildings along the demonstration route.
Furthermore, the operators inside the vehicles will be available to users for any questions concerning the system or innovative transport modes.
Page | 95
As CERN activity is fairly low during week-ends, showcases using demonstration vehicles
could be organized in neighboring communes aiming at targeting a larger audience and raising awareness of local population and authorities.
10.5.4 Processes
An electronic mailbox will be implemented to collect the opinions of users or of people potentially hampered by the system. The mailbox will be communicated through the various communication channels mentioned above.
10.6 SWOT analysis
The following elements have been identified in the SWOT analysis:
Strength
•
Technically savvy audience
•
Primary target group directly concerned by mobility issues for their operational efficiency
•
R&D project and design feel
Weaknesses
•
ARTS is not immediately seen as addressing the most critical mobility issues
•
Audience already highly exposed to information and communication
Threats
•
Technically savvy audience
•
Critical audience
•
Inefficient operation of the vehicles
•
Loss of management support
•
Lack of financial resources
Opportunities
•
Extension to neighboring communes population and politics
•
Demonstration in the context of last miles connection from public transport connection
•
Induce habits change
•
Deployment strategy following demonstration
Page | 96
10.7 Monitoring and evaluation Plan
Surveys will be conducted on-board the vehicles on a regular basis to evaluate satisfaction
and awareness evolution.
Similarly surveys through email will be done. For instance these survey results could be compared between people directly impacted by the service and people located remotely from the
demonstration route.
A suggestions/complains/congratulations mailbox will be available on CERN mobility website for users.
Finally a forum platform could be set up to try and implicate users even further into the
demonstration and the Citymobil2 project.
Page | 97
11. Ex-ante evaluation
Thanks to the dimensioning, indicators can be calculated to fulfil the Ex-Ante evaluation. The
following table aims at gathering values for indicators to be compared after the demonstration
(ex-post evaluation). For each indicator in this table, indications are provided about the calculation method, as a complement to the value and its units. For some indicators (travel times
per O-D, Change in range of key activities accessible), separate tables are provided below the
main table.
Indicator
Calculation method
Value
Units
Number of trips
sum of all values in the O-D matrix
2'735
trips per day
Effective capacity
of the system
deduced from the dimensioning
– depends on the vehicle capacity, the number of exploited vehicles and the rotation travel time
2'170
passengers per day per
way
Passenger-km
multiplication of the O-D matrix
and the inter-distances matrix
1'920
passenger-km cumulated on a day
Energy
consumption
multiplication of passenger-km
(pkm) by a 0.2 – 0.3 kWh/pkm
factor hypothesis
385 – 575
kWh per day
Average
occupancy
division of the passenger-km
total by the seats-km total
35%
average occupation of
vehicles for one day
Average
waiting time
calculation of the average waiting time for peak and off-peak
hours. No waiting time for lastmile passengers. Then, the daily
average is calculated
1’40’’
minutes and seconds of
waiting time
Number of
incidents
hypothesis based on pedestrians
density on the track
525
average number of incidents per day
(30’’ each)
Variability
of travel times
due to interactions with cars and
pedestrians, 3 incidents have
been considered
+0 to +1.5
additional time in
minutes per round trip
Table 19: Indicators for the Ex-Ante evaluation
Page | 98
Table 20: Travel times per O_D
Table 21: Change in range of key activities accessible
Page | 99
It is worth mentioning that the dimensioning phase has focused on peak periods, simplified in
representative hours. Indicators have been calculated for each of these "peak-representative
hours" and have then been aggregated with assumptions made on off-peak hours so as to obtain a general value for an entire day.
More precisely, peak periods in CERN represent 5.5 hours (7h30-9h30, 12h00-13h30 and
17h00-19h00) out of the 12.5 hours of exploitation (7h-19h30). It has been considered that
60% of activities occur during the 44% of these peak periods. Hence, by aggregating the values of one cumulative indicator for peak periods and dividing by 0.6, one can obtain the value
for the entire exploitation period. Finally, it can be useful to mention that all values are rounded to the nearest fifth.
Regarding land take, the demonstration route does not have a significant impact on other
transport modes. Only the removal of parking spaces inside the parking lot at the rear of
building 33 diminishes the space dedicated to private cars. This allows improving the integration of the automated road transport system and the link between buildings 33 and 500 for soft
modes. This represents an area of approximately 75 square meters more for pedestrians if one
considers only the new sidewalk and 600 square meters less for parking spaces.
Indicators related to the perception of the system by potential users are not evaluated in the
ex-ante. Surveys will be conducted during the demonstration and processed during the ex-post
evaluation.
Indicators related to economic and financial impacts of the demonstration are evaluated in the
“Financial proposal” chapter of the second deliverable.
Page | 100
12. Conclusion
CERN city study identifies the potential for ARTS in the CERN global multimodal concept. It
is certainly not though, a one type fits all solution but it could play a role in promoting the use
of public transport and cycling for accessing the sites. For many, the primary reason for keeping using their private cars is the absence mobility services for last-mile and on-site trip during the day. ARTS represents one of the solutions to fill in this gap.
For the time being, the organisation is not yet ready to move forward with ARTS implementation. Strategic, economic and legal limitations have been identified as the primary showstoppers.
Regarding the identified demonstration route, it comes out of the analysis performed that the
demand side could be met with the anticipated supply of 6 vehicles.
Finally, deliverable D12.2 will develop CERN demonstration proposal in greater details.
Page | 101
13. Sources
The following documents are referenced within this document:
[1]
MAESTRO consortium, «Guidelines for transport in the 21st century - MAESTRO Project,»
European Commission Research contract number PL-97-2162, Brussels, 2000.
[2]
GEA Vallotton et Chanard SA, Transitec, «CyberMove Report D2.4 “General process of urban
transport planning and integration: where and how do cybercars fit ?",» EC, December 2004.
[3]
CERN, «About CERN,» [Online]. Available: http://home.web.cern.ch/about. [Accessed June
2013].
[4]
«CERN directory,» CERN, [Online]. Available: http://directory.web.cern.ch/directory/.
[Accessed April 2013].
[5]
IN.S.T.A.L., National Technical University of Athens, «CERN's Transportation Plan: Deliverable
D3 - Part II, Findings from the Survey and Future Paths Proposals,» November 2011.
[6]
CERN,
«Bike
sharing,»
[Online].
Available:
dep.web.cern.ch/en/content/Mobility/Bike_sharing. [Accessed June 2013].
[7]
CERN, «Physics Department,» [Online]. Available:
dep/Services/SMI/Bikes.html. [Accessed June 2013].
[8]
CERN, «CERN Mobility,» [Online]. Available: http://gs-dep.web.cern.ch/en/content/Mobility.
[Accessed July 2013].
[9]
D2 - Transportation Netwrok Simulation Model, Vol.I,» May 2011.
[10]
Grand Genève: Agglomération franco-valdo-genevoise, «Présentation générale,» 2013.
[Accessed July 2013].
[11]
J.-B. Ferey, G. Widmer et B. Ziegler, «Annexe 4 - Mesures du Projet d’agglomération 2012 :
urbanisation, mobilité, paysage et environnement,» June 2012.
[12]
D3 - Part I, CERN's traffic Organization,» October 2011.
[13]
CTL, GEA, ISIS and TRG, «CityMobil 2 - FP7 Project: D1.1-D1.2 City study design, evaluation
and selection methodology,» 2012.
[14]
Conseil
Page | 102
Général
de
l'Ain,
«l'ain.fr,»
http://gs-
http://ph-dep.web.cern.ch/ph-
[Online].
Available:
http://www.ain.fr/jcms/aw_85374/tramainfr.
[15]
M.-P. Mayor, C. T. Zingg, B. Ziegler, D. Oppliger, M. Schuppisser, A.-L. Cantiniaux et H. V. d.
Wetering, «PACA - Genève/St-Genis, Project d'agglo franco-valdo-genevoise: Cahier n°81-1,
Rapport Final. Principes, Concepts et Mise en Oeuvre,» Geneva, August 2011.
[16]
M.-P. Mayor, C. T. Zingg, B. Ziegler, D. Oppliger, M. Schuppisser, A.-L. Cantiniaux et H. V. d.
Wetering, «PACA - Genève/St-Genis, Project d'agglo franco-valdo-genevoise: Cahier n°81-2,
Rapport Final, Fiches PSD,» Geneva, August 2011.
[17]
M. Güller, M. Güller, P. Le Fort, L. Brusset, J. I. Rodriguez, B. Ziegler, D. Oppliger, A. Défago, A.
Früh et S. Codina, «Schéma d'agglomération 2012 - Annexe 3: Urbanisation, mobilité,
paysage et environment,» June 2012.
Databases
http://www.ge.ch/statistique/
www.insee.fr/en
http://ge.ch/sitg/
http://www.grand-geneve.org/
http://www.ferney-voltaire.fr
http://www.saint-genis-pouilly.fr/
http://prevessin-moens.fr/
http://www.meyrin.ch/jahia/Jahia
http://www.vernier.ch/fr/
http://www.grand-saconnex.ch/fr/
CERN sites:
http://home.web.cern.ch/
https://maps.cern.ch/mapsearch/
http://directory.web.cern.ch/directory/#maps
https://espace.cern.ch/hostel-service/Wiki%20Pages/SaintGenis.aspx
Page | 103
14. Annex A: VOLTair five-step methodology
Figure 49: VOLTair methodology
Within the overall urban perimeter the mobility patterns, the need of functions and mobility
links to be provided are identified and subsequently, the focus is directed to restraint perimeters in order to choose the best tool for the right place. A multimodal concept can then be developed, which will address a global functional land-use and mobility strategy to be implemented through operational measures.
The multimodal concept and the urban space valorisation will translate the functional strategy
of the overall urban perimeter. It is a unique concept for each urban perimeter, and it will be
established upon the existing transport system infrastructure, facilities and services and their
future developments.
The definition of the multimodal concept for the global scale will allow identifying which
sectors have a need for transport supply, and, at this stage, the most adapted transport tool
should be picked up, in order to proceed with its dimensioning and deployment phasing.
Finally, the dimensioning step will comprise the principles of the local implementation of the
transport system chosen: the infrastructure, the rolling-stock and the operation system. This
stage comprises firstly a fine analysis of the potential local demand to satisfy, which allows,
secondly, the definition of the transport supply components.
The research land-use consultant GEA and its sub-contractor company Transitec, specialized
in transport engineering, gather complementary competences that enrich both the technical
and operational focus of the city study. The potential for demonstration integration was conducted with close interaction between local partners. On-site visits dedicated to identify the
urban land structure (geographic constrains, transport network and the built environment) and
the potential conflict zones, mobility generators and share of public space targets for different
transport modes complete the source database that has been analysed.
Page | 104
15. Annex B: CERN history
CERN was established by visionary scientists who imagined the creation of a European atomic physics laboratory, after the end of Second World War, in order to boost European science,
unite European scientists and allow them to share the increasing costs of nuclear physics facilities.
Following the example of international organisations, the first official proposal for the foundation of a European laboratory is put forward at the European Cultural Conference, which
opened in Lausanne on 9th of December 1949, by the French physicist Louis de Broglie. A
further push came at the 5th UNESCO General conference, held in Florence in June 1950, addressed by Nobel laureate Isidor Rabi.
At an intergovernmental meeting at UNESCO, held in Paris in 1951, the first resolution regarding the establishment of a European Council for Nuclear Research was adopted. Finally
in 1952, 12 countries signed an agreement establishing the provisional council, named in
French “Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire”, which was mandated to establish a
world-class fundamental physics research organisation in Europe.
The name CERN results from the acronym for the French designation of the provisional body.
At the time, the research in the pure physics field was concentrated in understanding the inside of the atom, therefore the word “nuclear”. The acronym was maintained for the new laboratory after the provisional council was dissolved, despite the name changed in 1954 to the
current Organisation Européenne pour la Recherche Nucléaire (European Organization for
Nuclear Research)
Nowadays, the organisation comprises 20 member states, of which 18 are part of the European Union (EU), 5 observer states and 2 observer organizations. It has also a cooperation
agreement with 37 countries and scientific contacts with other 19 countries.
CERN’s mission, following its establishment within the Commune of Meyrin in 1954, is the
development of an international research and experimentation campus, where each member
and observer state can access to use the most powerful resources in the world.
CERN's main area of research is particle physics – the study of the fundamental
constituents of matter and the forces acting between them, and due to this the laboratory operated by the organisation is often referred as the European Laboratory of Particle Physics.
Since its foundation, CERN has greatly expanded according to its needs, the existent opportunities and with limited planning. It is one of the international institutions located within the
canton of Geneva, in Switzerland, and it is internationally recognized for its exemplary experiments in physics nuclear.
Currently, the CERN activities are mostly directed towards operating the new Large Hadron
Collider (LHC) and the experiments related to it. The LHC embodies a worldwide large-scale
scientific cooperation project.
Nowadays some 10’000 scientists from over 113 countries come to CERN for their research,
and many students and visitors are welcome every day within its campus. Not only its worldwide members and contacts deeply imprint its internationally recognition as a science landPage | 105
mark, but also the success of the recent LHC operation has amplified this phenomenon among
worldwide citizens.
Figure 50 below schematises the CERN poles within the Swiss and French territory, which
are located around the Large Hardon Collider (LHC – LEP), the big ring, and the Super Proton Synchrotron (SPS), the small ring.
Figure 50: CERN internal sites in the region (Source:Source spécifiée non valide.)
The LHC tunnel is found 100 meters underground, in the region between Geneva International Airport (AIG) and the neighbouring Jura mountains. This accelerator uses the 27 km circular tunnel previously occupied by the Large Electron–Positron Collider (LEP), closed in November of 2000. On the LHC, there are seven experiments running (CMS, ATLAS, LHCb,
MoEDAL, TOTEM, LHC-forward and ALICE), each one of then studying particle collisions
from a different perspective, and making use of different technology approaches. Extraordinary technology efforts were provided to the construction of these experiments, which clearly
shows the deep investment and hope of the physics community, and supporting member
states, in the quest for the fundamental structure of the Universe.
The LHC was firstly operated in August 2008, and following a technical shutdown it was successfully operated in November 2009, according to the experiment objectives.
Page | 106
16. Annex C: Surroundings attractors and generators
The overall CERN perimeter is surrounded by several facilities, which are presented on Figure 51. The existing facilities are classified into the following categories: Sport and Leisure,
Culture, Training and Research, Trade and Retail, Health and Industrial and Manufacturing.
The main transports hubs are, nevertheless identified as they also constitute trip attraction and
generation poles.
Sport and Leisure
In the commune of Meyrin three sports centres are located in the vicinity of the Meyrin main
pole: the sport centre of Maisonnex, the sport centre of Cointrin, and the municipal sport centre of Les Vergers. The commune of Meyrin also hosts the Alpine Garden.
The commune of Vernier offers several sport facilities and leisure locations that include thematic trails such as the Nature trail oil, covering the theme of petroleum, and 10km greenway
route through the parks and the banks of the Rhône river in natural and semi-urban landscape.
The commune of Grand-Saconnex offers several green spaces which constitute leisure destinations, comprising nature parks, marsh area and a castle park.
In the French territory, the commune of Ferney-Voltaire offers several sports facilities, which
include a rugby and football fields; open-air and covered tennis courts, skate-board facilities,
a nautical and a sport centre.
Culture
Culture facilities are mainly located, within the Swiss territory, in Geneva city centre, and include several theatres, cinemas, museums, art centres and art galleries, libraries and
bookshops. Besides the cultural facilities, the city of Geneva yearly offers a rich and diverse
cultural agenda.
At the vicinity of Meyrin main pole, the cultural centre Forum Meyrin is a cultural attraction
offering different types of shows (theatre, circus, family, dance and music) that are hosted
every year, besides exhibitions and artistic ateliers.
The French territory offers several cultural projects, exhibitions and shows, essentially in the
commune of Ferney-Voltaire, which locates three public theatres, music and dance conservatorium and several historical monuments such as the Château de Voltaire.
Training and Research
In the Swiss vicinity of the CERN perimeter, the educational supply is quite dispersed and in
the communes of Meyrin, Vernier and Grand-Saconnex, which mostly locate kindergartens,
elementary schools and a few secondary schools. The higher education institutions are located
in the city centre of Geneva, and include the several poles of both the University of Geneva
(Unige) and the Geneva higher education institution (Hes-so Genève) as well as several private institutions.
In the French territory that surrounds the CERN perimeter, the educational offer is more concentrated in the urban centres of the communes of Saint-Genis-Pouilly, Prévessin-Moëns and
Page | 107
Ferney-Voltaire. These communes locate kindergartens, elementary schools, and secondary
school as well as one international secondary and high school, which is located in FerneyVoltaire, and will be extended to a 2nd site located in the commune of Saint-Genis-Pouilly that
will open in 2015.
Trade and Retail
The trade and retail areas surround the CERN overall perimeter either in the Swiss or French
territory, as they correspond to suburban retail centres that are mostly located in the outskirts
of the urban centres and villages. In addition, the centre of the city of Geneva also constitutes
an attraction for shopping as it locates all the usual urban commercial shops, dedicated to distinctive market segments and preferences.
The main Swiss shopping centres are the Balexert commercial centre, located in the commune
of Grand-Saconnex and the Migros facility at the Geneva airport. In France, the commune of
Saint-Genis-Pouilly locates the shopping facility that is the most accessible to CERN community. In the Prévessin-Moëns commune small retail shopping is located at the village centre
and in the activity park of “des Anneaux de Magny”.
Health
The La Tour hospital, located in the commune of Meyrin, and the Clinique of Joli-Mont are
the Swiss health facilities which are closest to Meyrin main pole. In addition, other important
health facilities, as the ones belonging to the Cantonal University Hospital of Geneva (HUG),
are located between the Rhône south river bank and the Arve north river bank, within the centre of the city of Geneva.
In the French territory, the hospital of Gex is the closest one, located at 12 kilometres from
CERN. The next health facility is located in Oyonnaz, 80 kilometres away from CERN.
Industrial and Manufacturing
In the Swiss territory, the communes of Vernier and Meyrin locate the CERN perimeter’s
closest industrial and manufacturing site of Zimeysa Sud, dedicated to industrial development,
industrial railway construction and manufacturing, with an international outreach.
The commune of Satigny (CH) also locates and important industrial site with international
relevance: Le Canada.
The industrial and manufacturing site located in the French commune of Saint-Genis-Pouilly:
the Pays de Gex Technopark, is deeply connected with CERN, as it combines not only industry and the development of technological activities but also a technologic cooperation convention with CERN. Additionally, this commune also hosts the activity zone of l’Allondon.
Page | 108
Figure 51: Main facilities around CERN overall perimeter
Page | 109
17. Annex D: Points of interest for visitors
#
Point of interest name
Description
1
Atlas
One of the seven particle detector experiments
constructed at the LHC.
2
Globe
Departure point for visits of the Laboratory. Holds
the “Universe of Particles” exhibition.
3
Reception
Arrival point for visitors. Identity checks.
4
“Microcosm”
Exhibition that offers a discovery of CERN adventure.
5
Synchrocyclotron
First CERN particle accelerator.
6
Main building
Hosts the majority of CERN services as well as the
main restaurant.
7
CLIC
Compact Linear Collider facility
8
LEIR
Low Energy Ion Ring
9
Computer Centre
Home of the CERN servers
10
Antiproton Decelerator
Hosts various experiments
11
SM18
LHC magnet test facility
12
CCC
CERN Control Centre
13
AMS
AMS project satellite control room
Table 22: Points of interest for visitors
Figure 52: P1: Meyrin main pole interest points for visits
Page | 110
Figure 53: P2: Prévessin main pole interest points for visits
Page | 111
18. Annex E: The FVG agglomeration
CERN is part of the “Franco-Valdo-Genevoise” (FVG) agglomeration. The agglomeration
comprises a vast area of 2,000 km² spread over the cantons of Geneva and Vaud, in the Swiss
territory, and the French departments of Ain and Haute-Savoie. It includes a total of 212 municipalities, 918’000 habitants and 440’000 jobs.
Below are presented the major planned developments that concern the CERN surrounding
territory and the most important measures in terms of transport and urbanization
 Genève (CH) – Meyrin (CH) – St-Genis (FR) et Cercle de l'Innovation (FR)
The measures defined for this development axis have three complementary objectives: (1)
better use of the railway line “ligne de la Plaine” improving its access by public transport and
soft modes, as well improving the interfaces; (2) a gradual expansion of main axes network in
France on the one hand, and the other hand to Vernier; (3) improve permeability of soft
modes and of the soft modes structuring network, including the extension of the greenways of
the agglomeration. The measures support the potential for development of the axis within the
Geneva territory and promote Saint-Genis-Pouilly as a regional centre within the central urban area, in connection with the arrival of the tramway. The close link between urbanization
and mobility is confirmed by a tramway axis contract, signed by the different competent authorities. From Geneva, these urban and economic developments contribute to the dynamics
of the Cercle de l'Innovation, a cross-border initiative between French and Swiss territories
that comprises a series of supra-regional and international scale sites existing or to be created.
Urbanization measures
#
Execution
horizon
st
(1 operations)
Description
UD2-11
CERN site
(densification and structure: 2’500 jobs)
2013
UD2-12
PSD Saint-Genis-Poully – Croissant Porte de France, Technoparc Porte de France site
(densification, extension, valorisation – 2’000 housing units,
1’500 jobs)
2014
UD2-15
Cercle d’Innovation (coordination and networking of centralities
of Saint-Genis-Poully, Ferney, airport, CERN Zimeysa, Nations)
NA
UD2-09
PSD Zimeysa extension site
(densification, extension, valorisation – 1’200 housing units,
16’000 jobs)
2019
Table 23: Second development axis - Urbanization measures
Page | 112
Transportation infrastructure measures
#
33-1
Description
Execution
horizon
Liste
Construction of the tramway line between Cornavin and
Meyrin-Cité (TMCM)
In service
NA
In service
NA
Construction of the tramway line between Meyrin and
CERN (diretíssima)
33-2
P + R of 50 places while the extension of the tramway
to Saint-Genis-Poully is not completed (P + R Porte de
France)
33-4
Construction and development of a soft modes connection between Saint-Genis-Poully and the activities area
of Zimeysa (greenway of the agglomeration)
Before 2015
A1
33-6
Requalification of the public space of the Route de Meyrin (CERN main pole of Meyrin)
Before 2015
Ongoing
A1
33-7
Construction of the tramway line between CERN and
Saint-Genis-Poully centre
2015
(operation:
2017)
A
33-9
Development of the station square and development of
Zimeysa and of the soft modes accessibility to this train
station incorporating a path enlargement or creating an
underpass below the train line
2015 - 2018
A
33-10
Development of a soft modes accessibility network to
the Vernier station
2015 - 2018
A
33-5
Development of a soft modes network in Saint-GenisPoully, Sergy and Thoiry (France)
2015
Av1
33-8
Requalification works on public transport access to improve the commercial speed of bus service feeders to
Saint-Genis-Poully (connection with the tramway)
>2022
C
Table 24: Second development axis - Transportation infrastructure measures
 Genève (CH) – Ferney (FR) – Gex (FR) and Cercle de l’Innovation (FR / CH)
The measures defined in this geographic cluster aim at improving, in a first stage, the public
transport and soft modes serving the Pays de Gex, linked with the densification and reinforcement of the regional centres of Ferney-Voltaire and Gex, and local centres of Ségny and
Maconnex, communes that focus urban development around the public transport axis. This
close link-urban mobility is confirmed by the signing of a BRT axis contract between competent authorities.
In a second stage, the extension of the tramway network will increase the capacity and attractiveness of the public transport network. In parallel, expanding the network of greenways also
allows a significant improvement in the attractiveness of the modes for the territories adjacent
to the urban core.
Page | 113
Transportation infrastructure measures
#
Description
Execution horizon
Liste
32-1-2
Construction of the tramway line between place des
Nations and Ferney-Voltaire with public space
requalification (Swiss territory)
2019-2022
B
32-1-7
Construction of the tramway line between place des
Nations and Ferney-Voltaire with public space
requalification (French territory)
> 2022
C
Table 25: First development axis - Transportation infrastructure measures
Urbanization measures
Description
Execution
horizon
st
(1 operations)
UD2-15
Cercle d’Innovation (coordination and networking of centralities
of Saint-Genis-Poully, Ferney, airport, CERN Zimeysa, Nations)
NA
UD2-04
PSD Ferney - Ornex - Prévessin
(densification and structure: 700 housing units - 700 jobs)
#
> 2022
Table 26: First development axis - Urbanization measures
Page | 114
19. Annex F: Accessibility isochrones
Beyond peak-hour traffic congestion period on Route of Meyrin, road accessibility is of high
quality. Figure 54 shows an estimation of all accessible areas within 10, 20 and 30 minutes.
The average speed is of 30 km/h, which takes into account traffic regulation and road occupancy. In case of congestion, the average speed can be much lower.
Figure 54: Isochrones of road transport accessibility
Figure 55 shows an estimation of all areas accessible from CERN within 10, 20, 30 and 45
minutes by public transport. It is assumed that the only accessible stop is "CERN" stop.
Figure 55: Isochrones of public transport accessibility
Page | 115
An average waiting time is considered equal to half of the line frequency. Changes are permitted. The trip duration are taken according to TPG timetables.
Figure 56 below shows an estimation of all areas that are accessible from CERN within 10, 20
and 30 minutes by bike, with an average speed of 15 km/h. It can be noticed that cycling between Meyrin and Prévessin is feasible in terms of travel time, but remains rather unsafe as
the "Route de l'Europe" is not equipped with a cycle path.
Figure 56: Isochrones of bike accessibility
Page | 116
20. Annex G: CERN transport possibilities
CERN official transport possibilities comprise the following modes: bicycle, motorized vehicles and other transport modes.
Table 5 summarizes the different transport options made available by CERN, followed by a
brief description of each one of these possibilities.
Motorized vehicles
CERN cars: traditional, gas and electric
900 vehicles
Car sharing
35 vehicles
Rental car – Taxi – Car Pool
Collective transport modes
On-demand shuttle
CERN shuttles: 5 routes
Bicycles
Bike rental
1’000 bicycles
Publi Bike
20 bicycles
Table 27: CERN official transport possibilities Source spécifiée non valide.
CERN car: The scheme principle is based on either a short-term lease or rental of the vehicles, which is allocated to the CERN departments and is annually renewed. The fleet includes
about 1'000 vehicles. It is worth mentioning that many users arrive at CERN with their private
car to transfer into CERN car for their professional duty.
CERN car sharing: The car-sharing scheme provides CERN vehicles on a self-service basis.
From 16 points around the Meyrin and Prévessin CERN main poles, a total of 35 vehicles
running on natural gas or petrol/diesel can be picked up.
The schedules of the CERN car sharing service are as follows:
•
from 8:00 to 18:00 for a maximum continuous period of 4 hours;
•
from 18:00 to 8:00 for a maximum continuous period of 14 hours.
The use of CERN car sharing vehicles for personal purposes is strictly forbidden.
Page | 117
The CERN statistics confirm that 1’031 RFID are distributed and that the average time of use
of CERN car sharing vehicles is between 30 minutes and 3h. In addition, between April 2012
and February 2013, an average of 1’160 bookings registered 19.
Rental car: If no mean of transport is available, or there is a need for a long-term official
travel, the CERN manages leases for vehicles and cars, commercial cars. This mobility option
is available to CERN members of the personnel and contractors’ personnel and is subject to
defined conditions.
Taxi: The taxi may be used for journeys from CERN to Geneva airport; to travel to Geneva
city centre, the Cornavin main station, or if the customer is travelling outside regular working
hours, when little transport supply is available.
Shuttle Service: The CERN shuttle service is a free of charge service that runs without the
need for reservation. The service is only available to people having a CERN access card.
On-demand Shuttle Service: Provided by a bus rental company for transport related to visits
and conferences. The reservations must be made through a web-based Service portal at least
24h in advanceSource spécifiée non valide..
Bike sharing scheme: CERN bicycle-sharing service is known as Publi Bike. Only members
of the CERN personnel are allowed to borrow Publi Bike bicycles. The bicycles are available,
free of charge, at the docking station installed on the car park of CERN reception.
The bicycles of CERN bike sharing scheme are made available to the CERN personnel members between 8:00 am and 7:00 pm in the frame of their work at CERN or
work-related activities only, for a maximum period of 8 consecutive hours.
The use of bicycles is subject to defined conditions and a Publi Bike subscription Source
spécifiée non valide.. The use of bicycles for personal purposes is strictly forbidden.
Bike rental: The CERN physics department section PH-AGS-SI manages the loan of a pool
of bicycles. The bicycles are loaned free of charge for summer students, and a fee of 1.- CHF
per day is charged to all members from the 1st of June to the 30th of September (high-season).
The conditions of use are regulated Source spécifiée non valide., and damages resulting from
improper use are charged to users.
Other transport solutions: CERN also encourages its personnel, contractors’ personnel and
users to use the car sharing schemes that are made available in the French Ain and HauteSavoie departments, as well as the web link for longer trips arrangements. In addition, public
transport usage is also encouraged, with information from both French and Swiss public
transport services (bus, tramway and train) provided on the CERN related website Source
spécifiée non valide..
19
Page | 118
Source : CERN statistics (CERN’s Department of General Service)
21. Annex H: Expert evaluation
Page | 119
Page | 120
Page | 121
Page | 122
Page | 123
22. Annex I: Demand analysis
It can be noted that:
•
Modal shares strongly depend on the country of residence, as public transport supply
is much more developed in Switzerland;
•
Highest volumes are related to private car trips in access to Meyrin;
•
An estimation of 1'600 trips are supported by the tramway (about 1'200 trips per day),
the Y bus line and the CERN shuttle linking Geneva Airport. It can be assumed that
these trips are mainly combined with walk to the destination, but also CERN car. The
attractiveness of the tramway could be stronger for people living in Switzerland if
their last-mile or if their non-car trips during the day were better covered by a public
transport system.
Several comments can be addressed to describe this table:
•
The higher volumes of trips are the soft modes trips inside Meyrin; it's known that
these trips are mainly made in the denser part of Meyrin's pole (in the eastern part of
the pole). These volumes include office-to-office trips, office-to-restaurant etc.
•
Yet, the volumes of car trips are important inside Meyrin and for a certain amount represent a "market" for the ARTS since the distances are inferior to 2 km;
•
Prévessin's pole being less populated, its number of internal trips is about 20% lower
than inside Meyrin's pole;
•
The survey of present CERN shuttles show that the occupation of lines varies between
70 and 130 trips per day depending on the line, with weekly and seasonal variations.
Though the supply is visible on-site, it is not competitive enough to be granted a significant modal share.
Figure 57 : Estimation of daily number of trips by private car inside Meyrin
Page | 124
Table 28: "In access" to CERN trips description
Table 29: CERN intra-pole trips description
Table 30: Trips inside Meyrin pole description
Page | 125
23. Annex J: CTL pre-design method
Prévessin
Parameters required for the calculation:
•
Total network length :
L = 2.7 km (to and fro)
•
Daily demand estimation :
D = 235 - 385 passengers per day
•
Vehicle capacity :
10 places
•
Maximum vehicle speed :
•
Maximum waiting at stops :
250 seconds
The following coefficients are based on several international experiences of implementation
of innovative transport systems.
•
an = 1.1 * 10-3,
bn = 1.732
•
aveh.km = 1.6 * 10-1,
bveh.km = 139.6
•
av = 15.783,
bv = -0.0557
•
apax/km = 3.89 * 10-2,
bpax/km = 4.76
Meyrin
Parameters required for the calculation:
•
Total network length:
L = 3.55 km (to and fro for both tracks)
•
Daily demand estimation :
D = 875 - 980 passengers per day
•
Vehicle capacity :
10 places
•
Maximum vehicle speed :
•
Maximum waiting at stops :
250 seconds
The following coefficients are based in results of several international experiences of implementation of transport systems considered innovative.
•
an = 1.1 * 10-3,
bn = 1.732
•
aveh.km = 1.6 * 10-1,
bveh.km = 139.6
•
av = 15.783,
bv = -0.0557
•
apax/km = 3.89 * 10-2,
bpax/km = 4.76
Page | 126
24. Annex K: Demand dimensioning assumptions
The following annex lists the hypotheses that have been used to fill origin-destination matrices for the three representative periods.
Hypotheses of demand estimation for the morning peak-hour
• only trips longer than one stop are considered;
• only trips in the direction of Restaurant 2 are considered, except people who would have
slept in the hostel and who would go to building 33 to embark on a CERN shuttle or
on the tramway;
• "last-mile" passengers from the tramway terminus :
1.
- the total number of employees of the catchment area are considered;
2.
- for the hostel, it is assumed that 40% of the 440 beds are occupied, of which
25% are people arriving with the tramway on the considered day;
3.
- a peak-hour factor of 36% is considered for the morning peak-hour, deduced
from measurements at the CERN tramway stop;
4.
- a lower peak-hour factor of 20% is considered for the hostel attractor;
5.
- the public transport share is estimated at 11% between "33" et "Hostel",
based on measurements at the CERN tramway stop; further, the public
transport share is considered as null;
- ARTS-catchment hypotheses have been made:
80% of modal share is considered from the public transport users between "33" and
"Hostel" stops; this figure shows that people who would walk today to their destination, would massively change their habits and use the ARTS;
5% of modal transfer is considered from private cars; this figure represents people
who would decide to use the bus or the tramway from their housing, thanks to the lastmile service enhancement.
• Additional "500-indirect-private car modal transfer" :
- an additional 5% of employees of each pocket would come by car to the eastern large
parking lots, profit from the services hosted by building 500 and then use the ARTS to
reach their office;
• Hostel users :
- Approximately 10 people would go to take a CERN shuttle around building 33,
whether to the airport or Prévessin's pole; otherwise, nobody would go to the tram
terminus during the morning peak-hour;
- From the 440 beds, 40% would be used, from which 75% would have spent the night
in Meyrin. From these 130 people, it is considered that a third (30 passengers) would
go to the buildings served by the "restaurant 2" stop.
Page | 127
Hypotheses of demand estimation for lunch-time representative hour
• demand is considered as symmetrical, since working hours are not strict at CERN and
the representative hour combines "early" and "late" mobility patterns;
• Restaurant-oriented trips :
- 1'500 meals served in restaurant 1 ("500" stop) and 750 meals served in restaurant 2
every day;
- these meals represent people travelling to and from both restaurants, either from the
catchment areas around ARTS stops or from other parts of CERN;
- Modal shares vary between 30% and 75% for walking, depending on the walkability
from their office to the restaurant;
- The modal transfer hypothesis reaches 20% for private car users, due to parking congestion around restaurants at lunch time. For people walking today, it varies between
30% and 60%;
- As a result, ARTS users going to restaurant 1 would come from : the restaurant 2
catchment area (35 people), and the PS area (50 people);
- ARTS users going to restaurant 2 would come from "33" (20 people), "500" (30 people) and the hostel catchment area (30 people).
• last-mile mobility patterns :
- It is assumed that mobility patterns similar to last-mile occur in both directions (to
and from the tramway) around lunch-time;
- in direct relation to the measurements at the tramway terminus, it is assumed that
these mobility patterns only represent 30% of what can be observed in the morning
peak-hour, but in both direction.
• building-to-building :
- It is assumed that 10 people per hour go from one stop to the other;
Hypotheses of demand estimation for late afternoon peak-hour
• Mobility patterns symmetrical to the morning peak-hour are observed, but with a
lower peak-hour factor of 20% instead of 36%. It could be called "first-mile" mobility
pattern;
• A building-to-building adjustment of 15 people per hour for each O-D pair has been
assumed.
Page | 128

CERN city study

Transcription

Similar documents

Física Teórica de Partículas

cinbad - CERN openlab

the programme - Passeport Big Bang

Medipix - Precisiebeurs

Lliswerry News Easter 2016

Identificazione e ricostruzione di elettroni e fotoni in CMS

[email protected]

Detectors for High-Energy (Heavy-Ion) Experiments

year 12 visit to cern year 12 visit to cern