CPCA Strategic Bus Review Reference number 107607 16/01/2019 CAMBRIDGESHIRE AND PETERBOROUGH STRATEGIC BUS REVIEW: OPTIONS REPORT IDENTIFICATION TABLE Client/Project owner Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority Project CPCA Strategic Bus Review Study Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Strategic Bus Review: Options Report Type of document Final Report Date 16/01/2019 Reference number 107607 Number of pages 81 APPROVAL Version Name Position Date Modifications Neill Birch; Ralph Project Director; Project Author 26/10/2018 Anderson; Peter Hardy Manager; Director 1 Draft Report Checked by Neill Birch Project Director 26/10/2018 Approved by Neill Birch Project Director 26/10/2018 Author Ralph Anderson Project Manager 04/12/2018 2 Checked by Neill Birch Project Director 04/12/2018 Draft Final Report Approved by Neill Birch Project Director 04/12/2018 Author Neill Birch Project Director 17/12/2018 3 Checked by Ralph Anderson Project Manager 17/12/2018 Draft Final Report Update Approved by Neill Birch Project Director 17/12/2018 Author Ralph Anderson Project Manager 16/01/2019 4 Checked by Neill Birch Project Director 16/01/2019 Final Report Approved by Neill Birch Project Director 16/01/2019 3.3 INTER-URBAN SERVICES 41 TABLE OF CONTENTS 3.4 POTENTIAL ROLE OF INTER-URBAN AND RURAL BUS SERVICES 44 3.5 WAY FORWARD FOR INTER-URBAN AND RURAL BUS SERVICES 44 1. INTRODUCTION 5 4. DELIVERING MODERN PUBLIC TRANSPORT 52 1.1 STUDY PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND 5 4.1 HOLISTIC DELIVERY OF PUBLIC TRANSPORT 52 1.2 PART 1 OF THE STUDY 5 4.2 FARES INITIATIVES 56 1.3 STRUCTURE OF THIS REPORT 5 4.3 POLITICAL SUPPORT 57 1.4 SCALE OF THE CHALLENGE 8 4.4 DELIVERY AGENCIES 57 1.5 CHANGES IN TECHNOLOGY, SOCIETY, AND THE DRIVERS FOR CHANGE IN TRANSPORT 11 4.5 DELIVERY MODELS 61 1.6 TECHNOLOGY AS A DISRUPTOR AND ENABLER IN THE TRANSPORT SECTOR 17 4.6 FUNDING 70 2. INTERVENTIONS IN THE CITIES’ NETWORKS 19 4.7 ACHIEVING FINANCIAL SUSTAINABILITY 73 2.1 INTRODUCTION 19 5. IMPLEMENTATION AND TRANSITION PLAN 78 2.2 ENHANCING THE EXISTING BUS NETWORKS 19 LIST OF FIGURES 2.3 TARGETED BUS PRIORITY 28 2.4 FLEXIBLE RESPONSES TO PASSENGER REQUIREMENTS 32 Figure 1. Summary of Mode Shares, 2011 9 2.5 VEHICLE QUALITY 34 Figure 2. Change in Bus Journeys Required to Meet Mode Share Aspirations 10 2.6 MULTI-MODAL INTEGRATION 34 Figure 3. Smart Phone Penetration by Age Group 12 2.7 NEW VEHICLE TECHNOLOGIES 36 Figure 4. Peterborough Citi Bus Route Map with Main Areas of Deprivation & Development 21 3. RURAL AND INTER-URBAN BUS SERVICES 38 Figure 5. Addenbrooke / Biomedical Campus Accessibility – Journey Time Map 23 3.1 INTRODUCTION 38 Figure 6. CAM Proposals Superimposed on Cambridge City Bus Network 3.2 RURAL BUS SERVICES 39 25 Figure 7. Challenges facing Buses in Central Cambridge 28 CPCA Strategic Bus Review Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Strategic Bus Review: Options Report 107607 Final Report 16/01/2019 Page 3/ 81 Figure 8. Illustrative Concept of a Green Travel Area for Cambridge and Bus Loop 30 Figure 9. A Typical Arrangement for Bus Priority Signals 31 Figure 10. Flexible, demand-responsive transport at peripheral locations 32 Figure 11. Busway services at Cambridge Station 35 Figure 12. Inter-urban Network, Rural Services, and Feeder Hub Concept Map 52 Figure 13. Holistic Delivery of Public Transport in CPCA area 52 Figure 14. Stakeholder Relationships – Transport for Cambridge and Peterborough 59 Figure 15. Potential Sources of Funding for Bus Service Enhancements 71 Figure 16. Process for Franchising 75 Figure 17. Indicative Implementation Plan 80 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Example of Relationship of Daytime to Evening/Sunday Bus Frequencies 20 Table 2. Rail Station Entries and Exits 42 Table 3. Application of 2017 Bus Services Act Powers to CPCA area 64 Table 4. Available Ticketing Obligations on Operators through 2017 Bus Services Act 67 Table 5. Comparison of Delivery Models for Partnership, Franchising and Integrated Ticketing 69 Table 6. Resource Implications of Enhancing Public Transport Delivery in CPCA area 72 Table 7. Strategic Interventions and Associated Delivery Models 79 CPCA Strategic Bus Review Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Strategic Bus Review: Options Report 107607 Final Report 16/01/2019 Page 4/ 81 1. INTRODUCTION transport network if options such as those presented conceptually here were to be taken forward. 1.1 Study Purpose and Background 1.2 Part 1 of the Study 1.1.1 SYSTRA Ltd was commissioned by the Cambridgeshire and 1.2.1 Previous work, documented in the study’s Part 1 Report, looked in Peterborough Combined Authority (CPCA) in May 2018 to undertake depth at the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and challenges a strategic review of bus service provision within the CPCA area. The (SWOC) associated with bus-based public transport in Peterborough study is intended to help explore opportunities for transformational and Cambridgeshire. change as well as for improving the service in short term (1-5 years), medium term (6-10 years), and long term (10+ years). 1.2.2 This is summarised in the diagram on the next page. The work for Part 1 has formed the basis for a wide-ranging option generation 1.1.2 The timing of this report means that a number of key transport exercise and sifting of potential options, until a coherent holistic set documents are in the process of being prepared, such as the Local of potential interventions has emerged covering short, medium and Transport Plan for the CPCA, the GCP’s Transport Strategy, and a long terms. number of detailed studies looking at delivering Cambridge’s City Access package. As such, this Bus Review cannot, and does not, seek 1.2.3 The Learning Points from the SWOC analysis formed the starting to present a single preferred solution for the network. It presents a point for developing options to ensure that buses play a viable role in range of options at a conceptual level which can help inform more supporting economic development in the CPCA area and delivering detailed planning and design in the future through other studies. This the very challenging levels of mode shift required. is likely to include documents such as the future CPCA Bus Strategy, which will be developed as part of or in parallel with the Local 1.3 Structure of this Report Transport Plan. 1.3.1 This report provides a summary of the option development stage of 1.1.3 For a number of the options presented, examples have been used to the study. illustrate the types of incidences where these could be applied. These examples should not preclude the development of alternative 1.3.2 The remainder of this introduction summarises the SWOC analysis approaches during more detailed planning of the network in other from the Part 1 report, describes the scale of the challenge, and studies. considers some of the changes in society and technology that will impact on transport in the future. 1.1.4 One of the key messages presented in this report is the need to consider different delivery models and funding – this is highlighted by 1.3.3 Section 2 of the report presents a range of conceptual interventions the step change that would be required in the delivery of the which highlight they types of actions which could be explored further CPCA Strategic Bus Review Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Strategic Bus Review: Options Report 107607 Final Report 16/01/2019 Page 5/ 81 to tackle the challenges faced in the cities of Peterborough and Cambridge. 1.3.4 Section 3 similarly presents conceptual interventions for further consideration in the context of rural and inter-urban bus services across the CPCA area. 1.3.5 Section 4 summarises potential delivery models for delivering these types of these transport interventions, including some of the examples presented in Sections 2 and 3. This includes discussion of funding and the consideration of financial sustainability. 1.3.6 Section 5 presents an indicative implementation and transition plan for how these types of transport could be implemented over time. CPCA Strategic Bus Review Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Strategic Bus Review: Options Report 107607 Final Report 16/01/2019 Page 6/ 81 WEAKNESSES STRENGTHS • Good geographical network coverage, including strong rail network • Inconsistent service offer, in particular in rural areas - frequency, accessibility and • Frequent services on many corridors, especially in cities journey time, times of day, information, etc. • 90% of bus network provided commercially • Inadequate coordination between services, especially Busway and P&R • Ongoing investment in the network - new technology, including RTPI, busway • Unattractive journey times by bus, in particular in rural areas • Park & Ride concept supported in Cambridge • Crowding (on some peak services) • External funding for bus services • Community transport provision inconsistent and restricted to users • Local environmental awareness • Some key travel desire lines not linked by direct bus - new developments not served • Local commitment to active travel, especially cycling • Congestion and conflicting priorities for road space (cycling versus bus) • Active community transport sector • Excessive supply of car parking • Existing integration of school and rural transport • Bus/rail integration poor • Willingness to trial new approaches (e.g. Zume) • Staff recruitment challenging • Bus users generally positive about bus service experience • Limited market research by commercial operators - limited appetite for innovation • Limited competition amongst commercial operators • Financial sustainability of existing