NPTDM recognises need for collaboration in design

Regular readers of this blog will know that I have been searching for any tools to enable users, operators and regulators of public tranport to be capable of collaboration on service design.  I have taken to writing to software companies and university research departments setting out the problem and asking for their suggestions on how this can be achieved.

The international Trapeze Group has kindly informed me that their National Public Transport Database Manager software does allow playback of both real-time and scheduled data and so allows you to see where every vehicle goes so that 'what if' scenarios in route and schedules can be visualised.

Interestingly the NPTDM information sheet  highlights exactly the point I am trying to make:

Working with other local authorities is the key to NPT Data Manager. You can share data with other authorities, improving your own service by seeing how neighbours’ services affect yours...

However, their director of sales advises me that to use this tool we are talking in terms of "some tens of thousands (of pounds) for the product". 

I have replied that tens of thousands of pounds would be out of the question for an individual town council or CTO but ensuring that communities have this capacity is in the national interest so I would lobby government to enable it. I see no reason either that the need for collaborative public transport design doesn’t apply to transport world-wide.

Put service design in the passengers' hands

At a town council meeting recently a member of the public stood up to complain that the recent changes in the local bus timetable had unforeseen consequences for many townspeople as they could no longer make a connection with another service (and other operator) that they regularly used to.

The particular details don't really matter as it is very common that a change in service to benefit passengers in one area will usually be to the detriment of others elsewhere. It is the simple domino effect of shifting resources.

Since the deregulation of the bus companies in 1985 it seems the decisions by operators are only driven by the bottom line instead of passenger need. Ensuring that their profits go up or that their costs go down or they gain some form of advantage for themselves as a commercial enterprise is naturally their duty to their shareholders.

What's missing from the process of consulting the public about service design in public transport is any capacity in the users and their elected officials to design services for themselves or even understand the implications. Just to appreciate the impact of the complaint, a unpaid councillor spent several hours plotting impentrable timetables into spreadsheets and it was still far from clear as to what a solution might be.

What passengers and communities need is free access to a software application that displays all the current bus, train and other public transport schedules and actual ground-covered routes in a given area on a map to visualise service and modal connections. On this they could enter proposed timetables and route variations so service alterations can be modelled and compared.

This shouldn't be hard to realise. Timetables are widely published and the GPS coordinates of bus stops and train stations are freely available. Features such as factoring-in vehicle slowing from peak passenger loading, vehicle speed, basic revenue and cost calculations should also be included.

A simulation engine would then move the vehicles around the map according to the timetables so that the different connections and modes could be visualised.

Then there might be happy discoveries that several buses cross paths on a rural road which ought to have a shelter placed there so it could become an interchange. It would also show that a Suffolk village only has 4 buses a week whereas a much smaller one has 25 buses a day running through it empty because of their fortunate position in-between service hubs and not because of demand.

But most importantly such a tool would then allow communities to design services for themselves or at least engage in a dialogue with operators armed with sufficient information to fully understand the impact of service proposals and changes.

A tool with these kinds of capabilities could answer the many 'what if' questions in public transport route planning that - because of complexity - is in the UK determined by commercial operators and by tendering for route subsidy common in rural areas. Communities would be able to visualise and cost local public transport provision for themselves and so enabled to lobby for services and amendments and analyse solutions such as community transport and DRT with data from this modelling. The capability to 'predict and provide' and consider service innovations will not be just in the hands of private operators but will also be where it belongs; with the users.

Then rather than pitting every village, town and parish against each other for a better service from the network provider through political patronage, transport planning can be made collaborative; as each stakeholder in a route will be able to work together and see how services to meet their needs would impact others and so more efficiently and fairly distribute the limited resources to statutory, commercial and charitable transport operators.

A contributor to a recent House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee report on transport and accessibility to public services said:

"Too many authorities choose to ‘do things’ to communities rather than spend the time finding out what they actually need and want first ... local people should be correctly liaised with prior to any changes being made, it is them that have to live with any consequences and they should be listened to correctly about how they will be impacted but also so they properly shape services..."

There are already demonstrations of live time-table simulation on the web. Here is a visualisation of the trains running from Norwich.

There is an open-source platform for train timetabling and planning called Open Track which can produce train schedule graphs from text timetables.

Software maker Zircon takes these train graphs a step further with a tool for visualising timetable conflicts in 3D. Their website has a video demo.

Train Graph

I will prevail on university transport departments in the UK and USA to give me any pointers to existing software or encourage them to undertake developing this as a project. I hope someone reading this one day will understand the problem and so be interested and will get in touch. 

nat (at) pixlink.co.uk

Buurtbus a wrong turn for D1 solution

On October 3rd I attended a sustianable transport conference where I had the good luck to buttonhole Dr. Stephen Hickey, chairman of the Community Transport Association. We had a coffee and chat about the D1 crisis; the challenge faced by many community transport operators with a dwinding supply of volunteers who can drive 16 passenger minibuses on a car license, otherwise they need to invest £2000 (which is unsecurable) in each one to pass a PSV. In April 2013 Sue Jay, the chair of Suffolk Community Transport, took the opportunity of a visit to Suffolk by the Department for Transport's cheif civil servant Graham Pendlebury to advise him that this is hampering the recruitment of volunteer drivers.

Dr. Hickey was well informed on the subject though apparently not of my campaigning on it. However I realised afterwards the Spring 2013 CTA journal has a round-up of minibus licensing issues and the D1 issue that says in the preamble: "the CTA has been receiving an increasing number of enquiries about driver licensing entitlelments..." It goes on to reproduce the same licensing flow-chart I drew back in 2011 and advises that operators in future may have to consider smaller and lighter minibuses for their fleets. But this is the nub; it is not practicable and it would lead to a reduction in services and increases in overheads for many volunteer-run operators if they had to switch from 16 passenger to 8 passenger buses or use lighter, less robust, buses under the MAM limits.

He told me the good news that he and Bill Freeman, the CTA chief executive, had recently had meetings at the Department for Transport and had presented the data from the recent CTA survey on the D1 issue. He recalled that the CTA survey had shown him the D1 issue was of great concern to his members and so the CTA had told the DfT that "D1 must be the top of the heap for policy change". The DfT was consulting on how the European Union helps or hampers transport in the UK.  The EU Balance of Competencies Review closed on 6th August 2013.

If I recall, Dr. Hickey said the DfT put the question to the CTA, given that D1 is EU legislation, what room does the DfT have to create a solution? I said that as far as I was concerned, the simplest solution was to make an exception to raise the MAM weight limit for community buses with volunteer drivers operating a section 22 route because the drivers (with MiDAS certification) would be familiar with their vehicles and the routes and this was a very different safety scenario to a school or community group using a minibus on a one-off trip. I put it to him that if necessary, the UK members of the European Parliament must present that proposal to the EU.

When I asked what he or the DfT thought might be the answer, he ventured the DfT were looking into the 'Buurtbus' model. Not necessarily as a solution to the D1 issue but to increase the saturation of services in rural or marginal areas. I haven't heard of these but Dr. Hickey explained they are widely operated in the Netherlands in partnership with commercial operators where 8 passenger buses are driven by volunteers on scheduled routes "at a minimum subsidy".

Coincidentally no doubt, the Summer 2013 issue of the CTA Journal has an article about the Buurtbus, stemming from a visit by CTA trustee Gareth Blackett to Amsterdam on an ATCO bursary. 

It turns out this innovative Dutch model was inspired by the UK. I would venture that HACT in Suffolk is a typical example in which a scheduled service is provided with a 16 passenger minibus driven by volunteers. 

There are now 200 Buurtbus schemes in the Netherlands, some established over 30 years. Gareth Blackett considered why are these so successful in the Netherland and posited it was becasue of "the nature of the partnership between the statutory authorities, commercial providors and the voluntary sector" in the Netherlands - indicating that this kind of cooperation isn't always the case in the UK, it is practically non-existent. The CTA reported "it is said that the Buurtbus could potentially offer a solution to the UK's accessibility challenge..."

The CTA journal promises in its next issue to reveal in more detail what Gareth Blackett learned. I might venture to suggest that if anyone wants to see what a successful 'Buurtbus' operation might be like, they ought to come to Halesworth.

What concerns me though, because Holland has the same rules, is that these Buurtbus are still operated with 8-passenger minibuses by volunteers with an ordinary car license and not a PSV.

However, with an average of 60 passengers per day in Halesworth, community transport operators like HACT could not meet that passenger demand with 8 passenger minibuses without a huge decrease in hard-won efficiency. It must use 16 passenger vehicles to meet present demand on a 50 mile daily route (4 to 5 cycles) within its resources of vehicles and volunteer staffing. There are also a number of other factors; a 16 passenger coachbuilt vehicle is a much more accessisble, efficient, versatile and comfortable vehicle than a smaller van conversion. 

In May 2013 the CTA gave evidence to the House of Commons Transport Committee which was holding an enquiry into transport for people with disabilities. The CTA Journal reports that acting chief executive Ewan Jones informed the committee: "even though people with disabilities might be entitled to concessionary travel, if there was not a vehicle they could get on or a service they could use, the entitlement would be of little use to them." Mr Jones also informed them how community transport was funded and how the sector was exploring new business models to remain sustainable.

There is potentially a host of issues in partnerships between voluntary, statutory and commercial bodies which some experienced voluntary operators can recall with bitterness and which the CTA hints at.

Halesworth's passenger cost per mile at an outstanding 90% of capacity is still a place where no commercial operator dares to tread without some form of subsidy. HACT receives no route subsidy but manages to make up the deficit in fare revenue by continually fundraising, so using up precious volunteer time and enthusiasm. I would also hazard a guess that the "minimum subsidy" provided in the Netherlands is much higher than any subsidy anticipated in the UK.

Department for Transport Ministerial Responsibilities

This is breakdown of the Department for Transport ministerial responsibilities following the most recent reshuffle.  Useful when writing to your M.P.

Patrick McLoughlin, Secretary of State for Transport:

• transport strategy, including economic growth and climate change
• spending review
• transport security
• high speed rail

Baroness Kramer, Minister of State of Transport:

• HS2 – Phase Two
• rail – funding and futures (including RIS, SOFA, ORR, stations policy)
• cities and urban renewal (including growth deals and Heseltine Review)
• localism and devolution
• local connectivity (including smart ticketing, buses, taxis, light rail and trams)
• accessibility and equalities
• future transport (including ULEV)
• natural environnent (including biofuels)
• SMEs
• international

Robert Goodwill, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport:

• aviation
• strategic roads and Highways Agency
• motoring agencies
• road safety and standards
• freight and logistics – including lorry road user charging
• local roads
• cycling
• HS2 Phase One
• Europe

Stephen Hammond, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport:

• rail – (including operational issues, major projects, fares and ticketing, Rail Delivery Group reform, franchising)
• London (including Crossrail)
• maritime
• Better Regulation
• corporate

Going Green Transport Project Report

Meeting report for Tuesday, October 1st 2013 at Halesworth Town Council Chamber, London Road. Follow-up information and comment in italics.

Attending:

MS Malcolm Smith: Halesworth Town Council Transport Officer
AD Cllr Annette Dunning: Chair of Halesworth Town Council
TG Trevor Garrod: Chair of ESTA
DA Derek Abbey: Bungay Town Council Transport Advisor
ST Cllr Simon Tobin:  Mayor of Southwold Town Council
NB Cllr Nat Bocking: Halesworth Town Council, HACT, Halesworth Bicycle Team (chair)

1. Apologies were received from Peter Aldous MP, Sue Doy: Southwold Town Council, Nicky Elliot: Beccles Town Council, Brenda Roberts: Southwold bus user

4. Situation reports:

a. The ESTA public transport service complaint log will be collated by Peter Cogan and so a summary report of issues/trends could be available by ESTA's next meeting on 12/10/13.

ESTA MONITOR - If your train or bus does not do what it says in the timetable - such as not waiting for a connection or (in the case of a bus) taking the wrong route let ESTA know by e-mail monitor@eastsuffolktravel.org.uk or write to ESTA Monitor, 3 Bury Hill, Woodbridge, IP12 1LF

b. Derek Abbey reported general good news from Bungay. The 88 service has been restored to a level it was before the cuts. Shelters for the stops near the pool, serving the large numbers of schoolchildren from Halesworth on the 88 are being installed. DA has discussed ongoing improvements with Philip Eden (new operations manager Anglian Buses) and flagged to them errors in new timetables but is pleased to notice that route timings suggested last year appear to be incorporated in their new timetables. DA is designing map/timetable for the one bus stop owned by the town council. NB suggested that DA contact ITO World in Ipswich who can cheaply produce maps and graphics from the Naptan and timetable databases. 

Passenger Transport magazine had a report on this tool: http://www.passengertransport.co.uk/2013/09/a-shop-window-for-bus-services/

c. Councillor Simon Tobin, mayor of Southwold, gave an update on the impact of the Southwold Shuttle service. It started on the 4th May 2013 and is now serving around 42 passengers per day, six days a week with a 7 passenger van with volunteer drivers and occasional 'bus buddy' to support passengers. Anecdotal evidence is that some elderly residents (one is 92) are now getting out more. It has enabled Reydon residents to access services in Southwold and vice-versa. Usage is likely to increase with opening of the Healthy Living Centre on the route and changing to a 16 passenger vehicle is contemplated. Residents of Oaklands residental home have asked for the shuttle bus to call regularly on Fridays. NB suggested it should be checked if a timetable variation has to be registered but it may not be necessary. Timings to connect to the 520 bus service meeting trains in Halesworth will be maintained as usage by tourists is encouraged. Fare is £1 or £3 all day and bus passes are accepted.

Members from Halesworth noted that this service joined with the hourly 520 makes a good offer to tourists and it could positively impact intermediate stops such as Blythburgh and Wenhaston as visitors (esp. with bus passes) might stop off to visit churches or pubs or take walks on their way to the Southwold pier or harbour entirely on public transport.

NB gave ST feedback which Southwold residents had made to him as GGTP chair that after the demolishing of the bus shelter at the market place, passengers are unsure of where they should wait for the shuttle bus. This also applies to the Harbour area. ST responded to a suggestion of 'lollipops' that it has been already actioned by STC with an approach to a disability employment charity to make signs.

d. General discussion: While there had been complaints about the Anglian Bus timetable changes (such as those brought to Halesworth Town Council on September 2nd) but across the board, those at the table reported there had been service improvements in other areas too. The replacement of roadside timetables by SCC does not appear to have happened yet on many stops.

It was noticed that some of the drivers notorious on certain routes for a poor attitude towards passengers appear to have been assigned elsewhere but there still one or two on buses serving Halesworth. One elderly passenger well known to GGTP has become very reluctant to use a particular bus because of a particular driver known to many. But in cheerfulness and politeness, the new drivers now on the 88A route are a great improvement.

It was reported there were some failures of Anglian's school buses to turn up early in September but that seems to have settled down now.

GGTP will welcome the information of people's complaints because it may be able to collectively advise on actions that can be taken but specific service issues ought to be raised by first writing to the operators and also copied to ESTA to become a matter of record. Where infrastructure is concerned (such as shelters) that should also be sent to town clerks for the benefit of the councillors. It is harder for GGTP to take up service complaints with operators if those operators haven't been informed in the first instance. In cases of an employee's general demeanour, or an unreliable service, consistent documentation is essential.

There was also discussion about the publishing dates of SCC combined timetables being out of sync with the operators and the distribution of new timetables taking time to reach the various outlets so adding to confusion. Derek Abbey checks on stocks at the library and the Chocolate Box in Bungay and finds that SCC and Anglian do send them out on request and any civic-minded people should be encouraged to do so in their locality.

e. Cllr Dunning and Malcolm Smith, transport officer for Halesworth, reported the creation of a bus station at the Angel Link in Halesworth was expected to begin in October with the addition of four cycle stands. The stops on Saxon's Way would be moved with the Jubilee shelter re-sited. The walking distance from there to the Thoroughfare would now be shorter and safer. Buses could wait there on breaks and the drivers would have access to the public conveniences of the Angel Hotel, thus reducing the nuisance of drivers taking breaks parked up elsewhere without such facilities. Coach operators need to be advised there is parking now.

5. Nat Bocking described the proposed HACT application for grant funding for ‘Handy Bus’ service to Halesworth for outlying villages. This application needs expressions of interest and evidence of need from communities/hamlets around Halesworth who can't access the services being provided in Halesworth such as the Halesworth Day Centre and other essential services tackling social need or rural isolation, which the grant funding wants to target. This would refine and build upon trials of a service model previously operated in Peasenhall in 2010 and Laxfield in 2011 to fill a gap between the community car services and unassisted public transport. It would enable better distribution of  resources to reach those in need and also enable communities to provide transport for themselves on a charter basis, as is done in Walberswick. Cllr Tobin offered to investigate whether there were people in Southwold that could have their needs met in Halesworth. The discussion moved into merits of Demand Responsive Transport (DRT) and what evidence there was that it served rural areas successfully and was giving good value. Nat Bocking pointed to research http://oro.open.ac.uk/19345/1/ that found systems integration across operators was essential but the current booking system often required passengers to book two separate journeys to cross service boundaries. 

TG offered to write to SCC on behalf of ESTA to enquire further.

SCC councillor Colin Hart (then with the transport portfolio) reported to Cabinet in May 2012 the SCC Scrutiny Committee had concluded that the DRT service is doing very well and that they had had good feedback from users.

However, on referral from SCC in August 2013, a Community Action Suffolk CDO dealt with a lengthy and detailed complaint about DRT from a parent of 4 children solely dependent on DRT to get them to school. They were unable to make bookings more than a few days in advance and felt the operator was ‘rationing’ service to them and not providing the two trips a day they needed for four passengers, whom they felt should get priority.

According to the SCTF meeting of September 11th, SCC has now withdrawn its support of the Mobisoft booking system (adoption for DRT announced in 2010).

9. A.O.B. 

a. Derek Abbey reported on the Car Free Day on 22nd September organised by Sustainable Bungay where Anglian buses carried 21 passengers on a special Sunday service and there were cycling and walking activities. Many at the meeting were aware of this event through social media but apparently there was some sort of foul-up with press advertising the free bus service.

b. Cllr Bocking reported on his twitter dialogue with Greater Anglia. Two weeks ago he found their website offered a new print-at-home ticket option which has since disappeared. He has raised with them that Halesworth station only has 2000 less passengers boarding per year than Beccles but did not get a ticket machine installed in a recent round of improvements though Beccles did. Cllr Dunning reports that Halesworth passengers have been able to take the online email confirmation with them to board the train and collect the ticket at their destination i.e. Ipswich or Liverpool Street. Cllr Bocking considered these ad-hoc and unpublicised arrangements do not serve the tourist nor those without access to a computer printer (those going online in a cafe or hotel) or those without internet access to obtain advance purchase tickets. 

Telephone buyers for Greater Anglia tickets pay 10p per minute or up to 40p per minute on mobiles and have an additional £6 delivery charge and require 2 working days.

Railwatch magazine reported issue 136 July 2013 that the Office of Rail Regulation has published station usage statistics for 2011-12 which show significant usage increases on the East Suffolk Line since the introduction of hourly services, 27% at Melton, 8% at Saxmundham. A footfall count at Halesworth will be carried out (or has been?) by the local branch of Railfuture later this year.

Date of next meeting, December 3rd, 2013, 10.30 am in the Halesworth Town Council Chamber, London Road.