Archived decisions

Contact: Peter Shelley, ext 6984 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report sets out the New Forest Area Review process, reports the outcome of tenders for local bus services in the New Forest, proposes a plan of action to ensure value for money, and seeks to enable transport services which give access to employment, education, health, retail and leisure facilities for the widest section of the community so enhancing our quality of place.

2. Background

2.1 With bus industry costs currently rising ahead of inflation (at around 9% per annum in contrast to a local authority funding increase of 2.5%) and forecast to continue to rise in future years, together with the uncertainty over Government revenue funding for bus support, it is crucial that Hampshire County Council reviews its current service provision in a comprehensive manner and demonstrates that:

(i) value for money is being achieved;

(ii) subsidy payments are open and transparent;

(iii) spending is undertaken within the context of Local Transport Plan 2 (LTP2) and bus strategy objectives;

(iv) the optimum balance is achieved between conventional and unconventional services;

(v) the relationship between secured and commercial services achieves the best possible efficiency; and

(vi) the monies are being used to maximise the ability to meet the unmet needs of Hampshire residents.

2.2 This should help to ensure that the County Council is in a position to enable a transport network in Hampshire which best matches the needs of its residents, whilst at the same time ensuring that this is affordable within the current and future financial environments.

3. Approach

3.1 The approach has been to undertake an area passenger transport review - one of a series throughout the county, based on the district council boundaries - in advance of the area retendering. These reviews represent a new approach to reviewing and planning passenger transport services in Hampshire.

3.2 The approach being adopted for these reviews embraces a combination of a practical desk-top exercise which uses Accession and census data as a basis, overlaying this with local technical knowledge and expertise together with survey information.

3.3 Options developed using this approach are scored on how well they enable people to access retail, health, leisure, work and education locations in the area being reviewed. This scoring assesses the options on how well they provide people with the opportunity to travel to these destinations, their frequency and flexibility together with their ability to offer a friendly and easy to use option for people with a range of disabilities, including wheelchair users.

3.4 A critical aspect of the review is the engagement of stakeholders in the process. In New Forest this has included bus operators, the District Council, the Community Transport sector and other key players. The cooperation of the major bus operators is critical to ensure that, where possible, the reviews consider both those services that are financially supported by the County Council and those that are operated on a wholly commercial basis. Stakeholder engagement has a key role to play in both developing the options and validating the final choice of options.

3.5 This approach is central to the Bus Strategy (an appendix to LTP2) which advocates the importance of identifying those services which are most likely to achieve greater bus use, as well as areas where social inclusion objectives may best be achieved.

3.6 These elements will form the foundation for any options coming out of the area reviews. They demonstrate a more visionary and flexible approach to providing passenger transport services in Hampshire in the future by:

(i) working in partnership with commercial bus operators to try and maintain the viability and attractiveness of bus services through improving journey times, simpler timetabling, targeted marketing and promotional activities, improved access and better coordination between operators in order to reverse long term passenger loss; and

(ii) greater and more effective use of `unconventional' transport, such as taxis, community transport, shared cars and demand responsive services, where conventional services are no longer appropriate.

4. New Forest Review - Context

4.1 Contracts for the main New Forest area have been extended to December 2006. Some contracts are part of the Romsey, Totton and Waterside tendering area, where contracts are due to run until June 2008. Most services, both commercial and contract, are operated by the Wilts and Dorset Bus Company. Solent Blue Line and Marchwood Motorways operate in the Totton and Waterside area and Herrington Coaches run in the Fordingbridge area.

4.2 Public bus services in the area are closely inter-worked with Home to School Transport movements and school and college contracts which limit the ability to offer simple `clockface' timetables economically. On many services there is a complex mix of commercial and contracted journeys restricting the tendered timetable which can be offered.

4.3 Wilts & Dorset is now part of the Go-Ahead group and this has led to a greater focus on commercial operations and urban areas. One result of this has been a number of de-registrations and withdrawals.

4.4 In 2005 Solent Blue Line also became part of the Go-Ahead group and from April 2006 introduced a new Bluestar bus network for the Waterside. This superseded some original proposals from the area review.

4.5 Hythe Ferry provides a valuable link between the New Forest and Southampton but the operation faces continued pressures and additional costs are likely to come forward this year.

4.6 DfT accessibility software Accession shows access to primary healthcare and food shopping for non-car households is 97% compared to 98% average for the county, however access to employment for jobseekers at 80% compares with a county-wide average of 95%. Commuting by bus and households without a car are both third lowest in Hampshire. Netley Marsh is in the top 20 deprived wards in Hampshire. Population density is the fourth lowest in the county.

4.7 The County Council is undertaking preliminary work for Quality Bus Partnerships (QBPs) on the Bluestar routes from the Waterside to Southampton and has undertaken infrastructure and information improvements between Lymington, New Milton and Barton-on-Sea. This investment will allow for good passenger growth.

4.8 Dorset County Council, Wiltshire County Council, Bournemouth Borough Council and Southampton City Council contribute towards the subsidy for services crossing the boundary into their areas and their views have been sought from the outset.

4.9 Community transport provision in the area includes the Call and Go demand responsive service, Wheels to Work for young people attending employment and training, car schemes and community minibuses. The County Council works in partnership with New Forest District Council and the Primary Care Trust for funding and delivery. Cango services operate in the Fordingbridge and Lymington areas.

4.10 The County Council spends £1,096,396 supplying local bus services in the New Forest. An additional £180,459 is spent on Cango and community transport services.

5. Consultation

5.1 Details of the area review and invitations for suggestions were sent to 80 individuals and organisations throughout the New Forest and a series of meetings of the New Forest Transport Forum were organised. At these the objectives of the review were set out, ideas invited and suggestions discussed from which a series of options were developed. The options shown here were reported back to the Forum and further comments invited. In addition, separate meetings were held with representatives of the District Council, Primary Care Trust, National Park Authority and principal bus operators.

6. Assessing the Options

6.1 Each option was assessed against its ability to provide access to the following facilities (LTP priorities):

(i) Retail - food shopping and one higher level retail;

(ii) Health - acute hospitals;

(iii) Health - local GP surgeries and health centres;

(iv) Leisure;

(v) Work; and

(vi) Education - primary, secondary and further.

6.2 Each option is scored against each set of access locations, showing:

(i) opportunity to travel to those destinations;

(ii) frequency and flexibility of service; and

(iii) ease of use for those with disabilities.

6.3 For the purpose of this analysis the three divisions of education are assessed separately and their scores combined. Each element has a possible score of 30, so that combined each option has a maximum score of 90. This is factored up to give a score out of 100.

6.4 Opportunity to Travel - the following are assessed:

(i) network coverage of home and destination;

(ii) home within 800 metres of stop, maximum one change; and

(iii) stop within 800 metres of destination.

6.5 Using the approach outlined in Section 3, a number of incremental options were considered. Details of each option are set out in the attached appendix.

(i) Base Position: the existing bus service and community transport provision.

(ii) Option1: greater linkage between Southampton-Lymington-Bournemouth serving the new Lymington hospital.

(iii) Option 2: as Option 1 plus simplified combined local service between Lymington Hospital-New Milton-Christchurch.

(iv) Option 3: as Option 2 plus redeployment of Lymington Cango.

(v) Option 4: as Option 3 plus non-conventional provision for Burley and Bransgore.

(vi) Option 5: as Option 4 plus non-conventional provision for the Fritham and Minstead areas.

6.6 Non-conventional transport can include Cango, taxi, demand-responsive minibus, semi-scheduled minibus and voluntary car schemes.

6.7 The following table estimates the costs of providing each of the options mentioned above and sets this against the access score achieved. The costs shown are existing costs as at April 2006 on a `like-for-like' basis.

6.8 Note that the above figures cover the review area, which differs from the tendering area, and include non-conventional services as well as the conventional ones which are the subject of the tendering process.

6.9 The above table clearly shows that all options offer a better access score than the existing network. Option 1 offers the optimum journey opportunities. However, whilst this will improve accessibility to the new hospital and along the axis served, it does not offer any savings which would help to address the financial pressures on the passenger transport budget. On the other hand Option 5 offers the most opportunity for savings yet achieves a median access score.

6.10 The access score shows that whilst Option 5 may not meet the accessibility levels of Option 1, it does nevertheless deliver an improvement on the existing situation. At the same time this option seems likely to generate some savings which will help to reduce the current budget pressures. The additional resource which will be provided for non-conventional transport will also have the opportunity of being more demand-responsive and flexible, and can therefore be targeted more effectively to local needs and aspirations.

6.11 Option 5 was placed before key stakeholders as the preferred option at the Forum and this option and other alternatives have been included in the subsequent tender exercise to obtain actual out-turn costs based on market prices.

6.12 The tender results showed a rise in costs for Option 5 of £100,000 above that predicted which has required further adjustments as set out in the appendix.

7. Outcome

7.1 The New Forest Area Review covered the area of the District Council to facilitate clearer consultation and incorporated both conventional bus services and non-conventional (community transport), whilst the tender boundaries cover a smaller area and are only for conventional bus services.

7.2 Because the review and tender area boundaries differ, and because of the review of Cango services, it has been possible to take forward some elements identified through the review in advance of the tender process.

7.3 The proposal in Option 3 to provide an alternative to the Lymington Cango is being progressed. A full year saving in the order of £40,000 is anticipated once details of the replacement service have been finalised.

7.4 The proposal in Option 5 to introduce non-conventional services for Fritham and Minstead was taken forward and a taxi-share scheme is now in operation. A full year saving in the order of £58,000 is anticipated.

7.5 The savings above form part of the Option 5 savings.

7.6 The preferred option showed possible savings of £123,000 to offset budget pressures and, as noted, some of the measures are already implemented or underway. The figures were based on current estimated prices as at April 2006 and the actual market prices are determined in the tendering exercise, detailed in Section 8.

8. The Retendering Process and Outcome

8.1 In advance of retendering, consultations were carried out with the District Council, parish councils, community groups and county Members on the proposed options. The current contracts for supported services in the New Forest have been extended to 31 December 2006. Twenty-seven bus or coach operators had previously expressed interest in tendering for supported services in the New Forest. All received full details of the proposed new contracts, including several different options on certain routes, to explore alternative service levels or provide scope for possible economies.

8.2 Tenders were issued for the existing pattern of services - for cost comparison purposes - as well as for the preferred option, Option 5, and other options developed as part of the review process.

8.3 Of the 27 companies which received tender specifications (an open list is required by the Transport Act 1985) only the principal bus company in the New Forest, Wilts & Dorset, actually tendered. These tenders were received on 12 September.

8.4 On receipt of the tenders it was apparent that to maintain the existing services in their current form, without implementing savings from the area review, would require an increase in expenditure of some £267,000 on services which currently cost £686,000, ie some 39% more. Both are gross amounts before cross-boundary financial support from neighbouring authorities, currently £127,000, which reduces the cost to the County Council. However, the larger than anticipated rises mean that even implementing Option 5 as proposed would result in a shortfall in funding of £100,000 per annum. Further adjustments in services are proposed to close this gap.

8.5 Subsequent analysis has identified where savings of £100,000 can be made with least effect on passengers. This is based on Option 5 as detailed above and comprises non-conventional provision for the evening peak journey for Burley and Bransgore - non-conventional transport is proposed off-peak as part of Option 5 - and supporting X34/X35 between Southampton, Burley and Ringwood only with connections for Bournemouth at Ringwood.

9. Conclusion

9.1 In order to contain expenditure to existing budget, it is proposed to adopt the recommendation from the New Forest area review (Option 5), and make further adjustments to services as set out above.

10. Impact Assessments

10.1 It is considered that the actions outlined above should not have any detrimental impact on equalities or race discrimination. The area reviews in particular seek to provide journey opportunity to key locations for all members of the community.

Recommendations

1. That approval be given to accept a tender based on the configuration of services set out in Option 5 of the New Forest passenger transport review in the light of the recently received tenders, which would result in the following service changes:

· Greater linkage between Southampton-Lymington-Bournemouth serving the new Lymington Hospital

· Simplified combined local service Lymington Hospital-New Milton-Christchurch

· Redeployment of Lymington Cango with tailored replacement

· Use of smaller vehicle to provide off-peak journeys for Burley and Bransgore

· Use of smaller vehicle to provide journeys for Fritham and Minstead.

2. That as the recently received tenders cost £100,000 more than the estimate for Option 5 the following adjustments be authorised to contain expenditure within the available budget:

(a) use of smaller vehicle to replace the evening peak conventional journey for Burley and Bransgore; and

(b) the X34/35 service to operate between Southampton, Burley and Ringwood only with connections at Ringwood for Bournemouth, rather than a through service.

913Rpt/PJJS

APPENDIX

PASSENGER TRANSPORT REVIEW AND RETENDERING

NEW FOREST

AREA REVIEW OPTIONS

Base Position: the existing bus service and community transport provision. This will maintain the existing opportunities to travel and provide a cost comparator for the other options.

Option1: greater linkage between Southampton-Lymington- Bournemouth by offering better connections at Lymington and re-routeing services 56/56A to serve the new Lymington hospital. This meets a key aim of providing good public transport access to the new hospital and provides synergy between two frontline routes.

Option 2: as Option 1 plus simplified combined local service between Lymington Hospital-New Milton-Christchurch. This allows a simpler service pattern, further links to the new hospital and resource savings. Links to rail services would be improved.

Option 3: as Option 2 plus redeployment of Lymington Cango. In this option the Lymington Cango is replaced by a more tailored and cost-effective provision.

Option 4: as Option 3 plus non-conventional provision for Burley and Bransgore. This allows more targeted use of resources and tailored journey opportunities where a conventional bus is not the best option.

Option 5: as Option 4 plus non-conventional provision for the Fritham and Minstead areas. Transport needs would be met using non- conventional transport such as a taxi share. A revised conventional bus network for Cadnam and west of Totton would meet requests for greater access to Tatchbury Mount Hospital.

FURTHER ADJUSTMENTS

To offset the higher than predicted tender prices further adjustments to services have been identified to meet the £100,000 overrun in out-turn costs. These propose changing the service pattern or vehicle used to have the least effect on passengers. This proposes non-conventional provision for the evening peak journey for Burley and Bransgore - non-conventional transport is proposed off-peak as part of Option 5 - and supporting X34/X35 between Southampton, Burley and Ringwood only with connections for Bournemouth at Ringwood.