Flexible Transport A new generation of user friendly

Flexible Transport A new generation of user friendly public transport for areas of low demand Public transport in regional and rural areas Tuesday 26 th June 2007

Structure of Presentation § Flexible Transport Services (FTS) – the concept § European Experience § Case Study: FTS in Tyne and Wear § Providing FTS § Other showcase research § Monitoring performance -the role of benchmarking in achieving quality/efficiency § FTS - Where next?

The concept European Experience Case Study Flexible Transport Services Providing FTS Other resources Monitoring performance Where next? The Concept

Flexible Transport Services (FTS) FTS are public transport services which cover a broad range of mobility products - usually operated by moderate and/or small capacity vehicles. Differentiating factor…. One or more dimensions of the service can be adjusted to meet the actual needs of the user

Components of a public transport service §Route §Vehicle §Operator §Passenger §Payment So the provision of a service is a complex activity

Increasing flexibility… Route Vehicle Operator Passenger Payment Fixed months in advance Fixed up to 1 hour before trip Limited periods of availability Long periods of availability Many types 1 type Commercial Competitive tender Special transport services Pay on vehicle Selected 1 hour before trip General public only Season ticket Increasing flexibility No restrictions Smart card

DRT as the leading form of FTS § General use services § Local and feeder services to trunk haul services § Replacing low-frequency conventional services § Replacing fixed routes in evening or weekends § Dedicated/special services, restricted to certain users § Services in low-density rural areas § Efficiencies in social mobility resources § Niche urban markets § Fuzzy line between small bus and big taxi

Evolution of FTS Basic One service provider One Agency (TDC) “Dial-a-ride” Manual booking and assignment Previous day (or earlier) booking most likely Proven Breakthrough in ITS technology Standalone One service provider One Agency (TDC) ITS supported services On-day booking likely Proven Breakthrough in B 2 B/B 2 C platform Expanded and Mature Agency Multiple service providers One Agency (TDC) ITS supported services On-day booking likely Proven Breakthrough in Business Model/transport organisation Interacting Agencies Multiple service providers Multiple Agencies optimise across modes & services ITS supported services: On-day booking likely Emerging

Multiple Agency – FAMS project Virtual Enterprise Flexible Agency for Intermediate Mobility Services B 2 C Services B 2 B Services • booking & • • • reservations • service information • . . . resource availability trip orders travel plans payments. . . WWW DRT Planning & Operation Services USER GROUPS / ASSOCIATIONS VEHICLE PROVIDERS, TRANSPORT OPERATORS REAL-TIME DATA EXCHANGE (GSM / GPRS) PICK-UP POINT DROP-OFF POINT SERVICE NETWORK

§The concept §European Experience §Case Study §Providing FTS §Other resources §Monitoring performance §Where next? European Experience

European Experience § Throughout Europe, a wide range of FTS have now been established, including: § Services for general use in rural areas. § Services for general use in periurban and suburban areas. § Dedicated services for users who face difficulties using regular public transport. § Replacement of fixed-line services at low demand periods.

Current practice in Europe by scale – mid 2006 Open DRT (for general public use) DRT for people with special needs Large scale DRT service providers (>1 M trips/yr) Netherlands (1) – integrated with special needs, about 50/50 Finland (1), Netherlands (1) Sweden (4), UK (3) Many ( >10 ) FTS schemes Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Sweden, UK Denmark, Finland, France, Netherlands, Norway Sweden, UK Some individual FTS schemes Austria, Ireland, Switzerland Belgium, Germany, Ireland, Italy Little or no FTS Czech, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Slovakia, Slovenia Austria, Czech, Cyprus, Estonia, Hungary, Greece, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta , Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Slovakia, Slovenia, Switzerland Only Finland has an emerging national framework for DRT

EU Sunrise project : demonstration sites Serving rural area with low demand Integrate DRT into urban network serving an area with low demand Car pooling serving people with disabilities Extending existing DRT

Other EU projects § SAMPO/SAMPLUS – early demonstrations of standalone services § E-drul – applying DRT principles to city logistics § EMIRES – linking job opportunities to public transport provision

Case Study §The concept §European Experience §Case Study §Providing FTS §Other resources §Monitoring performance §Where next? Flexible Transport Service Development in Tyne and Wear, UK

Tyne and Wear § An example of the evolution of multiple agencies working together in a single TDC § An example of integration of Flexible Services with § Urban routes § Other conventional or subsidised services

Evolution: the example of Tyne and Wear § 5 local authorities forming a connurbation of 540 square km § Socio-economic characteristics § Population 1. 07 m but declining § Low levels of income/ Poor health § Low but rapidly increasing car ownership § 42% of households have no car in Tyne and Wear § 27. 5% of households have no car nationally § Heavy industry replaced by service industry § Flexible shift patterns § Out of town business parks

Tyne and Wear: transport provision § Role of Nexus: Tyne and Wear Passenger Transport Executive (PTE) § Plan strategies and schemes/ Promote public transport § Procure non commercial services § Provide, manage and operate Metro and ferry § Provide special transport services § Characteristics of transport provision § Commercial operators on heavily used corridors § PTEs secure unprofitable services …. evenings and weekends

Tyne and Wear: Development of FTS § Experience since 1960 s of dial-a-ride (Care Service) transport services § Residents who cannot use conventional public transport/Multiple trip purposes permitted § Basic scheduling software § Bus booked 24 hours in advance via Call Centre § Nexus owns and operates vehicles

Tyne and Wear: Development of FTS (cont) § U Call: Urban Bus Challenge Government Funding (from 2002) § No user restrictions/ Semi-fixed routes § Trapeze telematics-based booking and scheduling system § On-board Mobile Data Terminals § Bus booked up to 30 minutes in advance § 4 dedicated low floor vehicles – owned by Nexus, competitive tender for operation

Tyne and Wear: Development of FTS (cont) § Combined TDC and Traveline Call Centre § Additional Nexus services § Dial-a-ride added to Call centre § Rural Bus Challenge U Call … same provision as Urban § Link to business parks § Taxibus service booked through transport operator § New clients § Scheduling services for other statutory authorities § Beginnings of Regional Call Centre?

Tyne and Wear: Development of FTS (cont) Nexus U Call: Outer West Newcastle Semi-fixed – Bus No restriction Nexus U Cab: South Tyneside Fully flexible – Taxi No restriction Nexus U Call: Sunderland Semi-fixed – Bus No restriction TDC at Nexus Care Services: Tyne & Wear Fully flexible – Bus Disabled and Elderly Nexus U Call: Western Gateshead Semi-fixed – Bus No restriction Special Needs Education Services Tyne and Wear (scheduling) Fully flexible – Bus Special needs education Age Concern Newcastle Fully flexible – Bus Elderly North Tyneside Council Adult Services North Tyneside Fully flexible – Bus Adult learning disability Northumberland Co Council Shilbottle Taxibus Semi-fixed – Taxi No restriction Durham County Council Cross border Semi-fixed – Bus No restriction Patient Transport Services Sunderland Hospital Fully flexible – Bus Renal dialysis patients Nexus financed service Non Nexus financed service

Tyne and Wear – Route 19 § Against a background of declining public transport use § Success of flexible service linking business park north of river to workers in south of river (via Ferry) § Service started as FTS § Patronage grew as part of aggressive travel planning in business park § Now a regular service

UK: Viability of DRT § Many DRT services require subsidy to meet gap between Revenues – Costs § Authorities need arguments to justify a Cost and Benefit Comparison § Many benefits not yet quantified: § User benefits (although this is progressing) § Non-user benefits

§The concept Providing Flexible Transport Services §European Experience User Needs §Case Study Technologies §Providing FTS Service Design §Other resources §Monitoring performance §Where next? Marketing and Promotion – in particular awareness raising Longer term strategies – multiple services and partnerships

A Flexible Transport Service Is the provision of a public transport trip in the same way as a conventional public transport journey provides trips for its passengers BUT § Flexibility introduces elements that § § May not be used in a conventional service § May have greater/less importance in the provision of a flexible transport service

User Needs

User Needs § Essential in the planning of the service § Works best as a ‘bottom up’ approach Flexibility of booking method Flexibility of prebooking period Flexibility of route

Methodologies for establishing user needs § Informal § Historical knowledge § Ad hoc feedback § Formal § Semi-structured interviews § Surveys (on-street, on-vehicles, household) § Public meetings / Focus Groups § Web based information

Technologies

Use of technologies Source: Brake et al (2006)

Implications of choice § Can have an implication for costs (eg IVRS can give staff cost savings at TDC) § Institutional factors may have implications for eg multiple agency working § Using technology in fare collection eg smart cards can provide for fairer distribution between operators and authorities (if involved) § Interoperability is improved when using compatible equipment eg ITSO compliant

Service Design

Source: Brake et al (2006) Examples Service Route Concepts

Awareness Raising

Awareness Raising § The more flexible a service becomes the less visible it is to the end user. § Conventional marketing techniques need to be supplemented by aggressive marketing of the FTS product.

Who and how to inform § Most marketing at present is aimed at direct users. With FTS better to both: § Target potential users directly § Target organisations that can identify potential direct users § Different approaches are needed at different stages in service development § Before need to explain the character of the service § After starting users need motivation to continue whilst carefully targeting new ones

Examples of posters

Longer term solutions Managing multiple services and Partnerships

Decisions for long-term sustainability Centralised or Dispersed management? Geographical aspects Organisational aspects Management resources Level of telematics Exit strategy

Partnerships § Not all transport services are fully utilised § Sharing capacity can bring overall savings in many different elements § Dispatching costs § Purchasing and operation of vehicles § Revenues need not be affected so with lower costs services become more viable

Partnership: a Good but Impossible Idea? § § Managing multiple services shows how resources can be shared Sharing on a wider basis means § Management sharing § Sharing of dispatching § Brokerage of vehicles Establishing common pool of resources – not ‘mine’ or ‘yours’ but ‘ours’. Savings then belong to partnership not ‘my budget’ or ‘your budget’ Recognising that governance issues are all important and will need hard work to resolve

Benefits of Partnerships § § Partnerships offer the opportunity to ‘share’ thus reducing both avoidable and non-avoidable costs Partnerships offer real long run savings § Can be used to make better services OR § maintain more marginal services

§The concept Other Resources §European Experience §Case Study §Providing FTS §Other resources §Monitoring performance §Where next? 1. CONNECT project – free access web based portal with information and training packages 2. UK Good Practice Guide

CONNECT Project www. flexibletransport. org Main activities of CONNECT (CONcepts for NEw Collective Transport) § Web-based Knowledge Base / Virtual Library § Development of skills and training § Guidelines and recommendations for supporting business development § User Communities Workshops § Training modules available for download and to be rolled out across UK

Connect Portal

Training Modules § Module A: Systems and operations for FCMS § Module B: Technologies for FCMS § Module C: Vehicles and vehicle technologies § Module D: Impacts of FCMS § Module E: Business development § Module F: Best Practices

UK Good Practice Guide § Web downloadable from www. ceg. ncl. ac. uk/research/transport/projects/goodpractice. htm § § Designed to assist in the provision of telematics based FTS To demonstrate role of DRT to citizen mobility within budgetary constraints Contains practical experience and a series of ‘Be aware of…. ’ A mixture of experience dissemination and innovation

UK: Good Practice Guide Sections on: § The concept § Economic framework § Technologies § Service Design § Managing multiple services § Marketing/Promotion § Partnerships – the future

UK: Good Practice Guide innovations Economic Framework § Discussion of viability § Introduction to economic decision making based on avoidable cost – ‘those costs which can properly be attributed to a service and are outlays which are avoided if the service is withdrawn’ § The relationship between revenues and fares § Issues about costs and how services are procured – including the role of risk

§The concept §European Experience §Case Study §Providing FTS §Other resources §Monitoring performance §Where next? Monitoring Performance

Monitoring Performance and Quality/Efficiency § Travel Dispatch Performance § Multiple services dispatched can reduce unit cost but lack of local knowledge can be a problem § Driver performance § Critical in achieving customer satisfaction Passengers Call Centre Drivers Staff

Monitoring Performance and Quality/Efficiency § Vehicle performance § ‘one size fits all’ OR § Vehicle brokerage § Route performance § Passengers carried, number of users § Approach to publicity

Monitoring Performance and Quality/Efficiency - cont § Customer attitudes § High satisfaction but little modal shift § Difficulties in understanding FTS BUT Customer attitudes difficult to measure as they are experienced in ‘bundles’ of quality

The role of benchmarking – the benchmarking cycle

§The concept §European Experience §Case Study §Providing FTS §Other resources §Monitoring performance §Where next?

FTS – the future § Vehicle brokerage between authorities and agencies to reap economies of scale § Scheduling and booking system used to get most appropriate vehicle for journey requested § Find commercial niches § At employment shift changeover § Evenings and weekends § Education § Leisure and retail § Convert low demand fixed services to DRT – either by geographical area or by time of day

§ Dr Corinne Mulley corinne. mulley@ncl. ac. uk

Identifying potential passengers § § § § Who are they? How do they use transport now? Where is it difficult to reach? Why is it difficult to reach these places/activities? Would they change to public transport if it were more appropriate? Acceptance of new forms of public transport Acceptance of public transport constraints Safety and security

Service Design § Service Design is a critical stage ideally developed with stakeholders the travelling public § bus (and other) operators § the local authority, and § the dispatch centre manager There needs to be: § A willingness for key actors to be flexible § Comprehensive user requirements undertaken § Awareness of the constraints involved (space, time, type of vehicle, payment method)

Sunrise: Florence and Bratislava Firenze: feasibility study to extend current DRT service §to the hotels of the metropolitan area of Florence §to service an area where a major hospital of the area is located. Bratislava: feasibility study to integrate DRT §in poor serviced urban areas §with the traditional fixed network of public transport.