Archived decisions

Contact: Andrew Wilson, ext 6984

1. Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

(i) That the Quality Bus Partnership Study be endorsed.

(ii) That the County Council develops Quality Bus Partnerships with Stagecoach, Solent Blue Line, First Group and other neighbouring local authorities over the next five years to establish and develop Quality Bus Partnerships for the top ten bus routes listed in paragraph 11.1 of the report, subject to available funding.

(iii) That a preferred supplier of bus shelters for Quality Bus Partnership routes be appointed.

2. Reason

2.1 To ensure that the County Council's investment in Quality Bus Partnerships (QBPs) is targeted at the routes that are best placed to achieve growth in passenger numbers and deliver modal shift from private car to public transport.

2.2 The appointment of a preferred supplier of bus shelters for QBP routes will avoid the tendering process for each route, and consequently speed up delivery of schemes and ensure consistency and quality on QBP routes.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 None.

4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or a Member or Officer consulted - none.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - not applicable.

6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - not applicable.

Approved by: Date:

Councillor K B Estlin

7. Introduction

7.1 Overall QBP agreements have been signed with Stagecoach, First Group and Solent Blue Line. A number of individual, route specific QBPs are being progressed by the County Council and its partners under these `umbrella' agreements. QBPs are a strong tool for making bus services more reliable, convenient, frequent and accessible, and achieving passenger growth.

7.2 The most advanced QBP in Hampshire is Service 23 in the Havant area, where the County Council has implemented improved infrastructure at bus stops, including raised access kerbs, high quality bus stop poles with integral information and new bus shelters. Stagecoach increased the frequency of the service from every 15 minutes to every 10 minutes, and introduced new easy-access, branded vehicles. This joint investment has resulted in patronage growth of approximately 25%.

7.3 QBPs can assist the County Council in achieving its targets for increased bus use within the Local Transport Plan (LTP) and Central Government's Public Service Agreement (PSA). The PSA target for bus use is to increase patronage from 1999/00 levels by 10% by 2010, with improvements in punctuality and reliability. There is an interim target of a 2.5% increase by March 2004. The bus routes in Hampshire most capable of achieving this target are those being developed as QBPs.

7.4 Under QBP agreements, bus operators are encouraged to increase the frequency of services, introduce modern, easy-access buses and improve branding, marketing and staff training. The role of the County Council is to carry out improvements to infrastructure and passenger facilities, including new bus shelters and bus stop poles with information at every bus stop, raised access kerbs to assist passengers with buggies and the mobility impaired, improvements to bus stations and interchanges, and bus priority measures to reduce journey times.

8. Background

8.1 As part of the Best Value Action Plan for Passenger Transport, a study was required to ensure that investment is targeted at the routes where QBPs will deliver passenger growth and modal shift. The County Council's QBP proposals have previously not been selected according to any robust empirical criteria. TAS Consultancy was commissioned to carry out the study and identify those bus routes in Hampshire most suited to QBP development.

8.2 Hampshire's major bus operators of commercial services are Stagecoach, First Group, Solent Blue Line and Wilts & Dorset. Their services account for 94% of commercial bus passengers in Hampshire. For the purpose of this study, all `significant' commercial bus services that operate at least hourly and carry more than 1,000 passengers per day were assessed.

9. The Study

9.1 The key aims of the study were to:

(i) identify potential QBP routes in Hampshire;

(ii) prioritise routes for investment purposes; and

(iii) advise on strengths and weaknesses of QBPs elsewhere in the country.

9.2 Stagecoach, First Group and Solent Blue Line provided two weeks of electronic ticket machine data for analysis. TAS used this data to build a model of the county's commercial bus network. Wilts & Dorset refused to provide any data for the study, despite reassurances from officers and TAS that the information would be treated in the strictest confidence. Consequently, Wilts & Dorset's services form no part of the results.

9.3 In order to provide a comparison between services, each service was scored against the following criteria:

(i) average passenger numbers;

(ii) passengers per bus hour;

(iii) potential passenger growth;

(iv) infrastructure costs;

(v) population characteristics;

(vi) additional passengers per peak-hour vehicle;

(vii) aspirations for QBPs by operators and/or district councils;

(viii) potential for developer funding;

(ix) low floor buses already in operation; and

(x) possibility of co-funding with neighbouring authorities.

10. Consultation

10.1 TAS held individual consultation meetings with Stagecoach, Solent Blue Line, First Group and Wilts & Dorset to discuss their opinions on Hampshire's QBPs, together with any plans for investment in the Hampshire network. Overall the operators were very supportive of the County Council's work in developing QBPs. All the bus operators stressed that bus priority measures are essential to the success of a QBP in delivering operational benefits. This can lead to increased investment on their part and enhance the scope for improved frequencies. These concerns are reflected nationally as research carried out by TAS indicates that the level of investment in QBPs by local authorities, particularly in bus priority measures, can directly influence the level of investment by operators.

10.2 TAS and County Council officers also held a consultation meeting with officers of Hampshire's District, Borough and City Councils and the two unitary authorities, who were invited to put forward any aspirations for QBPs in their areas.

11. Study Outputs

11.1 The benchmarking process produced a hierarchy of routes that have the strongest potential to produce passenger growth as part of a QBP. These QBPs should be developed as part of the LTP works. TAS suggested the QBP components and development options for each of the top ten routes.

(i) Service 23 Leigh Park-Havant-Portsmouth, operated by Stagecoach Coastline - South East Hampshire Transport Strategy (SEHTS) area. This is an existing QBP route, with increased frequency, new easy access buses, improved roadside infrastructure and passenger facilities all implemented.

(ii) Service 41 Horndean-Waterlooville-Portsmouth, operated by First Hampshire - SEHTS area. This is an existing QBP route with an extensive programme of works being developed through the A3 Quality Bus Priority Corridor as part of South Hampshire Rapid Transit.

(iii) Service 1 Aldershot-Farnborough-Yateley, operated by Stagecoach in Hampshire and Surrey - North East Hampshire Transport Strategy area. This is an existing QBP route with bus priority measures and infrastructure improvements in progress. The bus service was improved in 2001 with low-floor vehicles and frequency improved to 15 minutes.

(iv) Services 82-88 Fareham-Gosport corridor, operated by First Hampshire - SEHTS area. This QBP will provide high quality bus links into the LRT service for those people out of walking distance of LRT. Selective bus priority measures and infrastructure improvements could be introduced. Low-floor single deck vehicles already operate on the routes.

(v) Service 40 Wecock Farm-Waterlooville-Portsmouth, operated by First Hampshire - SEHTS area. There is scope to improve infrastructure and introduce bus priority. It would also benefit from shared sections of route on the A3 corridor so many improvements would be delivered at marginal cost. A joint approach with Portsmouth City Council would be beneficial.

(vi) Services 1/1A Fareham-Portsmouth, operated by First Hampshire - SEHTS area. This could include bus priority measures between Fareham and Cosham, with improved infrastructure and the introduction of modern easy-access vehicles. This service would provide a further link into the A3 Quality Bus Corridor.

(vii) Service 21 Havant-West Leigh-Portsmouth, operated by Stagecoach Coastline - SEHTS area. Improved infrastructure and bus priority measures would feed into the A3 corridor. Benefits would again be delivered at marginal cost.

(viii) Service 48 Southampton-Eastleigh-Fair Oak, operated by Solent Blue Line - South West Hampshire Transport Strategy (SWHTS) area. This route forms part of the Eastleigh Area QBP. A QBP would benefit from a joint approach with Southampton City Council to secure bus priority measures and improved passenger infrastructure to develop a Quality Bus Corridor. Most journeys are already operated by easy-access buses, but Solent Blue Line needs to commit to 100% operation by easy-access vehicles to fully benefit the QBP. There could be a possibility of improved frequency if journey times are reduced through bus priority measures.

(ix) Service 1 Hatch Warren-Basingstoke-Tadley, operated by Stagecoach in Hampshire - Basingstoke Environmental Strategy for Transport area. A QBP is under development for this route, including bus priority measures and improved passenger infrastructure. Operators could invest in low-floor vehicles.

(x) Service 47 Southampton-Chandlers Ford-Winchester, operated by Solent Blue Line - SWHTS and Winchester Movement and Access Plan (WMAP) area. This QBP would benefit from joint working with Southampton City Council. Bus priority measures and improved passenger facilities would create a Quality Bus Corridor. Most journeys are already operated by low-floor buses, but Solent Blue Line needs to commit to 100% easy-access vehicle operation. Possibility of improved frequency if journey times are reduced.

11.2 It is not surprising that the above bus services show the greatest potential for increasing patronage as part of a QBP. They all serve relatively densely populated urban areas. These services also display the characteristics of successful QBPs from elsewhere in the country, as shown in paragraph 12.1.

11.3 No bus services are recommended for a QBP within the Central Hampshire and New Forest Transport Strategy Areas. This is due to the mainly rural characteristics of these areas. In the Western Hampshire Transport Strategy area the Service A Town Centre-King Arthur's Way could be considered as a QBP. Within WMAP the Service 5 Winnall-City Centre-Badger's Farm demonstrates the most potential and is already being developed as a QBP as part of the European MIRACLES project.

11.4 In those areas where QBPs are not considered suitable there are other tools that are relevant to enhance bus services. Here the County Council could work together with private operators to implement Information Partnerships. These are designed to achieve passenger growth through information, ticketing and marketing initiatives. The European Union TAPESTRY project is already examining such measures in East Hampshire and its recommendations could be rolled out in other parts of the county. Network Ticketing initiatives are also being assessed, which could prove beneficial where a number of operators serve the area.

11.5 Further tools to improve bus services in the areas where QBPs are not suitable include modest improvements to infrastructure, for example installation of raised boarding kerbs, new bus shelters and improvements to interchange points. An example of improvements to rural bus services is the Testbed Demand Responsive bus service project in the Andover area.

12. Experience from Quality Bus Partnerships Elsewhere in the Country

12.1 As a result of research carried out by TAS on behalf of the Department for Transport into QBPs nationwide, it is recommend that QBP routes should have the following characteristics:

(i) urban focus;

(ii) more than 85% commercially operated services;

(iii) large operators with access to funding;

(iv) frequency of 15 minutes or more; and

(v) current operator investment in new vehicles or increased frequency.

The County Council's QBP development to date satisfies these criteria.

12.2 TAS identified a number of weaknesses with QBPs nationwide, as follows:

(i) bus priority measures are often implemented where it is easy rather than where most needed;

(ii) monitoring of QBPs is weak, especially in terms of perceptions, modal shift and journey times;

(iii) operator investment can depend on scale of investment by local authorities; and

(iv) it is difficult to coordinate investment by partners due to differing timescales.

The County Council needs to ensure that these issues are addressed prior to QBP implementation and to ensure partnership working and joint investment is fostered throughout the QBP process.

13. Supply of Bus Shelters for Quality Bus Partnership Routes

13.1 A key role for the County Council in the implementation of QBPs is the provision of high quality passenger waiting facilities at the roadside and at bus stations. The County Council currently lets tenders for the supply of bus shelters for each QBP route. This results in the duplication of work for each new contract. The appointment of a preferred bus shelter supplier for QBP routes would result in a more efficient delivery of improved infrastructure and ensure a consistent county-wide approach to the provision of shelters being installed on QBP routes.

14. Conclusion

14.1 Within the LTP QBP agreements between the County Council and commercial bus operators will allow the County Council to build strong partnerships and foster shared investment in Hampshire's public transport network. The County Council is already working closely with operators on a number of QBPs to enhance all aspects of the bus service and improve the `total journey experience' for passengers.

14.2 As part of the County Council's commitment to QBPs, a number of initiatives can be developed where funding permits, such as bus priority measures, improvements to bus stations and interchanges, improved bus stop facilities including new shelters, raised access kerbs and the provision of improved information. Funding could be made available from the LTP, PSA agreements and developer contributions.

14.3 Approval of the QBP study will help provide a framework for the County Council's investment in QBPs over the next five years within the LTP. These agreements will strengthen partnership working arrangements with private transport operators and help to achieve the County Council's targets for increased public transport use.

14.4 The appointment of a preferred supplier of bus shelters for QBP routes will ensure a consistent, high quality approach to passenger waiting facilities on all QBP routes across the county.

7219/AW