Archived decisions

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

1. Summary

1.1 This report sets out the Havant Area Review process, reports the outcome of tenders for local bus services in the Havant area, 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 well-being.

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 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 Havant this has included bus operators, the Borough 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. Havant Review - Context

4.1 Contracts for the main Havant area have been extended to December 2006. The Havant tendering area includes a wider area than the borough itself. Most services, both commercial and contract, are operated by three bus companies, the First bus company, Stagecoach and Emsworth & District.

4.2 Havant is a densely populated borough with the second highest level of commuting by bus in Hampshire - 5.3%, up from 4.7% between 1991 and 2001.

4.3 The borough includes the four most deprived wards in Hampshire in Leigh Park, though Leigh Park does benefit from good bus services.

4.4 The borough is good bus territory with key corridors having buses every 15 minutes or more, many operated with low-floor vehicles.

4.5 Department for Transport accessibility software, Accession shows that accessibility to employment, education, health, shopping and leisure is generally very good, with non-conventional transport catering for some small areas which would otherwise be isolated.

4.6 The County Council has established successful Quality Bus Partnerships (QBPs) with Havant Borough Council and the commercial bus operators, including the ground breaking A3 quality corridor, and routes 21, 23 and 700. A new £1.8 million bus station was recently opened in Havant. This significant investment will allow for good passenger growth and further QBPs are being developed for the 37, 39 and 40.

4.7 Industry cost pressures have affected services away from the busiest corridors and some services which were previously operated commercially now need subsidy support, such as the 22 and 63. Evening and Sunday services are seeing reduced patronage.

4.8 Many subsidised services are operated within combined contracts. These offer savings to the County Council compared to individual contracts but can be less inviting to smaller operators. Because services may be inter-worked, the saving from withdrawal of an individual service will be less than its notional cost.

4.9 West Sussex County Council, East Hampshire District Council and Portsmouth City Council contribute towards the subsidy for services crossing the boundary into their areas, and their views have been sought from the outset.

4.10 Community transport provision in the area includes the Call and Go demand-responsive service, car schemes and community mini-buses. The County Council works in partnership with Havant Borough Council for funding and delivery. Car share schemes operate in the Lovedean and Northney areas and the Borough Council supports the Hayling Island car share service to the ferry.

5. Consultation

5.1 Details of the area review and invitations for suggestions were sent to 40 individuals and organisations in Havant. A public meeting was arranged in Leigh Park, as was a meeting with Borough Council officers and attendance at the Havant Traffic and Transport Panel. At these objectives were set out, ideas invited and suggestions discussed from which a series of options were developed. The options shown here were reported back to meetings with County Council and District Council Members and further comment invited.

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. This would maintain the existing opportunities to travel and provides a cost comparator.

(ii) Option1: rationalise bus, keep existing community transport and car share.

(iii) Option 2: rationalise bus, absorb car share.

(iv) Option 3: rationalise bus, reduce daytime, maintain community transport.

(v) Option 4: reduce bus, maintain community transport.

(vi) Option 5: Increase bus, maintain community transport.

6.6 Non-conventional transport can include Call and Go, taxi, demand-responsive minibus, semi-scheduled mini-bus 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 includes non-conventional services as well as the conventional services which are the subject of the tendering process.

6.9 The above table shows that Options 1 and 2 offer a better access score than the existing network but produce only modest budget savings.

6.10 Option 5 offers the highest access score but is also the highest cost option so does not take account of the future sustainable funding situation.

6.11 Option 4 has an access score of two points below the existing situation but offers the most cost saving, £90,000 to offset future budget pressures.

6.12 Option 4 would deliver an improvement on the anticipated outcome if no action was taken and offer the most opportunity for cost savings to help retain other supported services in Havant.

6.13 Option 4 was placed before key stakeholders as the preferred option at the meetings with Members and this option and other alternatives have been included in the subsequent tender exercise to produce actual out-turn costs based on market prices.

6.14 The tender results showed a rise in costs for Option 4 of £50,000 above that predicted which has required further adjustments as set out in the appendix.

7. Outcome

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

7.2 The preferred option showed possible savings of £90,000 to offset budget pressures, however this was 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 Borough Council, community groups and county Members on the proposed options. The current contracts for supported services in the Havant tendering area expire on 31 December 2006. Thirty bus or coach operators had previously expressed interest in tendering for supported services in this area but only eight of these requested details of the contracts when contacted. Of these eight, only the three existing operators of supported bus services in the Havant area actually submitted tenders. These are Stagecoach, First and Emsworth & District. Tenders were received on 5 September.

8.2 Tenders were issued for the existing pattern of services - for cost comparison purposes - as well as for the preferred option, Option 4, and other options developed as part of the review process.

8.3 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 £167,000 on services which currently cost £683,000, ie some 24% more. The larger than anticipated rises mean that even implementing Option 4 as proposed would result in a shortfall of funding of £50,000 per annum. Further adjustments to service levels are proposed to close this gap.

8.4 Subsequent analysis has identified how savings of £50,000 can be made most effectively, with least effect on passengers. This is based on Option 4 as detailed above and additionally includes reducing the frequency of service 27 which links Emsworth, Havant and Rowlands Castle.

9. Conclusion

9.1 In order to contain expenditure to existing budget, it is proposed to adopt the recommendation from the Havant area review (Option 4), and make further adjustments to service levels 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 tenders based on the configuration of services set out in Option 4 of the Havant passenger transport review in the light of the recently received tenders, which would result in the following service changes:

· Bus service 22 would no longer run

· Divert bus service 27 via New Lane and West Leigh combine with bus service 611

· Bus service 30/31: withdraw last round trip on Sunday evenings

· Bus service 39: slightly reduce weekday evening service, withdraw Sunday evening service

· Bus service X40/41: supported journeys would no longer run

· Replace bus service 42 with extended Lovedean car share

· Combine Hayling Island school bus services 629/634.

2. That as the recently received tenders cost £50,000 more than the estimate for Option 4, the following adjustment be authorised to contain expenditure within the available budget:

the frequency of service 27, which links Emsworth, Havant and Rowland's Castle, is reduced.

915Rpt/PJJS

APPENDIX

PASSENGER TRANSPORT REVIEW AND RETENDERING - HAVANT

Option 1: Rationalise bus, keep existing Community Transport and car share

· Bus service 22: Hourly shuttle between West Leigh and Queen Alexandra Hospital

· Combine school bus service 611 with 27

· Bus service X40: Cut one poorly-used afternoon journey

· Divert Bus service 63 to serve Littlepark Avenue instead of 36

· Combine Hayling Island school bus services 629/634

Option 2: Rationalise bus, absorb car share

As Option 1 plus:

· Combine Lovedean car share with bus service 42

· Combine Northney car share with Community Transport

Option 3: Rationalise bus, reduce daytime, maintain Community Transport

As Option 1 plus:

· Bus service 22 would no longer run

· Divert Bus service 27 to serve New Lane and West Leigh

· Absorb Lovedean car share into bus service 42

Option 4: Reduce bus, maintain Community Transport

· Bus service 22 would no longer run

· Divert bus service 27 via New Lane and West Leigh combine with bus service 611

· Bus service 30/31: withdraw last round trip on Sunday evenings

· Bus service 39: slightly reduce weekday evening service, withdraw Sunday evening service

· Bus service X40/41: supported journeys would no longer run

· Replace bus service 42 with extended Lovedean car share

· Combine Hayling Island school bus services 629/634

Option 5: Increase bus, maintain Community Transport

· Maintain existing bus network and additionally operate:

- Leigh Park Flyer fast service to Portsmouth

- Connections to Queen Alexandra hospital and bus service 23 for North End

- Provide Rail Link buses Waterlooville to Petersfield

- Possible `Pedicab' demonstration on Hayling Island

- Use Developers' Contributions for new services

FURTHER ADJUSTMENTS

To offset the higher than predicted tender prices, further adjustments to the level of service have been identified to meet the £50,000 overrun in out-turn costs. It is proposed that the frequency of service 27 which links Emsworth, Havant and Rowland's Castle be reduced in a way which minimises the effect on passengers.