TfGM Bus franchising

[cnjb8]

Though Nottingham have also introduced a parking levy?

Brighton and Bristol don't have council-owned bus companies; they do have very good bus company managers and supportive local authorities though. Bristol is an interesting point in that there is a multi-operator day ticket that isn't promoted by First....but also doesn't form part of the tender requirements for the local authority tenders.

The binary "public sector good, private sector evil" is overly simplistic. Take Cardiff Bus who are a decent operator but seemingly thwarted by their council whereas along the road in Newport.....

The parking levy is more to pay for the tram and rescuing the council from the Robin Hood energy fiasco.

Are the London depots owned by TfL?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The parking levy is more to pay for the tram and rescuing the council from the Robin Hood energy fiasco.

I don't think in any case that the "stick" measures will have that much of an effect if the carrot of a genuine quality service isn't there (unless you make the levy absolutely swingeing, e.g. in line with the London congestion charge). Provincial bus travel in the UK, with a few notable exceptions, is just not that nice. Therefore, people will drive even if it costs more.

I find the likes of Stagecoach Gold interesting in this context, because they are what it should all be like, as the likes of Trent and Transdev have realised. An interesting question is what quality level Manchester will look to in the tenders.

 

[edwin_m]

The parking levy is more to pay for the tram and rescuing the council from the Robin Hood energy fiasco.

It was introduced well before the Robin Hood Energy business and I believe is earmarked for transport.

 

[overthewater]

What are the chances many of the new bus routes will be revised to connect with the tram lines?

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was introduced well before the Robin Hood Energy business and I believe is earmarked for transport.

One of the obvious problems with funding public transport and cycling from levies on the use of private motor vehicles is that you can't be too successful. It works as a pump primer and a deterrent, but you can't plan for it to work indefinitely.

What are the chances many of the new bus routes will be revised to connect with the tram lines?

I would hope they will, even if they then continue into the centre. A bus stop at the traffic lights 200m from the tramstop isn't as attractive as a bus from the tram station forecourt.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Are the London depots owned by TfL?

No, they are owned by the operators which is why you will have depots in rather close proximity to one another from different firms.

I don't think in any case that the "stick" measures will have that much of an effect if the carrot of a genuine quality service isn't there (unless you make the levy absolutely swingeing, e.g. in line with the London congestion charge). Provincial bus travel in the UK, with a few notable exceptions, is just not that nice. Therefore, people will drive even if it costs more.

I find the likes of Stagecoach Gold interesting in this context, because they are what it should all be like, as the likes of Trent and Transdev have realised. An interesting question is what quality level Manchester will look to in the tenders.

That is true but by the same token, there's no real indication of any quality service. Why sit on even a new bus if it's still stuck in traffic? These things have to go together - improve bus priority so travel times are competitive and reliability is assured, have modern comfortable vehicles, and remove some of the things that make car use easy. Imagine if Manchester City Council (with TfGM) had reduced the number of on-street car parking spaces by 5% a year?

What are the chances many of the new bus routes will be revised to connect with the tram lines?

I would hope they will, even if they then continue into the centre. A bus stop at the traffic lights 200m from the tramstop isn't as attractive as a bus from the tram station forecourt.

The thing is, many locations already have buses connecting with trams.

Eccles, Oldham, Rochdale, Altrincham, Bury, Whitefield..... the list goes on. The issue on a number of lines and their location is that the tramline follows the rail alignment so they're not always easy to service the intermediate points so places like Prestwich are a 5 min divert off the main road and round the shops and back out, or Pomona which is on an island almost, and then Trafford Bar which is also tucked away. I confess I'm less familiar with stuff on the east side.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That is true but by the same token, there's no real indication of any quality service. Why sit on even a new bus if it's still stuck in traffic? These things have to go together - improve bus priority so travel times are competitive and reliability is assured, have modern comfortable vehicles, and remove some of the things that make car use easy. Imagine if Manchester City Council (with TfGM) had reduced the number of on-street car parking spaces by 5% a year?

With regard to priority (done right) that's a good point. I've rarely seen it done right in the UK, though, typically bus lanes end 20m before a junction which makes them near useless.

I'm less sure about the stick of reducing parking. That just gets peoples' backs up when the public transport option is not up to scratch. In a large, congested city like Manchester, by making good use of rail options and planned connections, you should be able to get overall journey times much quicker than by car. Then who'd drive?

The thing is, a 45 minute bus ride in from Stepping Hill (say) will be unattractive even if you have perfect bus priority, because you can drive it in half an hour, because your car doesn't have to stop every few hundred yards to pick people up.

There are two fixes to that. One is to thin the stops a bit (in Germany they are typically about every 500m, in the UK often every 200m or even closer). Another is to get the ticketing off the bus entirely. This has been achieved in London, and it also needs to be a priority in Manchester. If you operate dual-door with touch-in touch-off, you get the stops down to sub 20 seconds. As things stand, with people paying fares to the driver after a chat about where they're going (I only jest slightly) most stops will be over a minute. This is something that the mind boggles as to why the commercial operators haven't dealt with it, because it has a direct impact on PVR and thus their costs, so solving it would benefit both them and their passengers. I see this as typical industry conservatism that it seems unable to break out of.

 

[Man of Kent]

Of course Manchester could go that way if someone set up an operator CIC and successfully underbid the commercial operators, as they might reasonably be able to do as they won't want a 10% profit margin (or thereabouts).

It had one, Manchester Community Transport. It held many TfGM contracts, and though briefly taken under the umbrella of HCT Group (parent of CT Plus, Libertybus, its Guernsey equivalent, Bristol CT, CT Plus Yorkshire and Powells in South Yorkshire) was a commercial failure and shut down in April 2020. Plenty of info by googling it.

 

[Gareth]

There are two fixes to that. One is to thin the stops a bit (in Germany they are typically about every 500m, in the UK often every 200m or even closer). Another is to get the ticketing off the bus entirely. This has been achieved in London, and it also needs to be a priority in Manchester. If you operate dual-door with touch-in touch-off, you get the stops down to sub 20 seconds. As things stand, with people paying fares to the driver after a chat about where they're going (I only jest slightly) most stops will be over a minute. This is something that the mind boggles as to why the commercial operators haven't dealt with it, because it has a direct impact on PVR and thus their costs, so solving it would benefit both them and their passengers. I see this as typical industry conservatism that it seems unable to break out of.

I agree with dual door and touch in. One thing that sometimes surprises me in certain continental countries is near universal use of ticket machines at bus stops. One would think this prohibitively expensive but I've seen it in countries supposedly poorer than our own.

Realtime info on where the buses are is also helpful. Arriva have a decent app but, naturally, it doesn't cover other operators. There needs to be one for all services.

The stop-spacing thing, I agree to up to a point. Sometimes they can be too close together, although 500m seems a bit far to me.

 

[Man of Kent]

Are the London depots owned by TfL?

No, they are owned by the operators which is why you will have depots in rather close proximity to one another from different firms.

Actually, TfL do own some depots and lease them out to operators. I believe the list is Ash Grove, Brixton Tramshed, Edgware, Fulwell, Twickenham, Walworth, West Ham and Uxbridge.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It had one, Manchester Community Transport. It held many TfGM contracts, and though briefly taken under the umbrella of HCT Group (parent of CT Plus, Libertybus, its Guernsey equivalent, Bristol CT, CT Plus Yorkshire and Powells in South Yorkshire) was a commercial failure and shut down in April 2020. Plenty of info by googling it.

Yes, I do recall that, I'll chuck up another thread as it seems an interesting general bus discussion I'm not sure we have had before.

Edit: here it is: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...s-done-well-in-the-deregulated-market.215609/

I agree with dual door and touch in. One thing that sometimes surprises me in certain continental countries is near universal use of ticket machines at bus stops. One would think this prohibitively expensive but I've seen it in countries supposedly poorer than our own.

Only UK places I've seen it are Edinburgh (now removed, I think) and the Cambs busway. One issue is whether you clutter stops with several operators' machines, I suppose. The other one is an unwillingness to simplify single fares. That said I'm not sure that's the way to do it now - probably easier to advertise the mobile app and accept contactless. You could I guess get into a deal with supermarkets and similar to sell pre-paid contactless bus vouchers for cash, just like they do iTunes vouchers and the likes, which you'd just use as a contactless card. Then no real need to sell anything on board.

Realtime info on where the buses are is also helpful. Arriva have a decent app but, naturally, it doesn't cover other operators. There needs to be one for all services.

Google Maps has a real-time feed from most operators. Curiously not Stagecoach the last time I checked, though.

The stop-spacing thing, I agree to up to a point. Sometimes they can be too close together, although 500m seems a bit far to me.

It can be, yes. Like diverting into all the estates, it's a trade off between attracting people out of cars and providing accessibility to those of limited mobility. You effectively can't do both with the same bus. What you can do, I suppose, is to have something like the 192 run all stops from Hazel Grove to Stockport then call at only a few key stops on the way into Manchester, with a separate Stockport-Manchester service picking up the local stops. I guess that isn't seen as commercially viable, but that's one of the flaws in things being decided simply on how Stagecoach can make the most money out of a given vehicle and driver - a 45 minute bus ride for a journey that can easily be driven in under 30 minutes simply isn't attractive to a car driver.

(I know the 192 is probably a bad-ish example because it completely duplicates the railway as far as Levenshulme station and so in Germany would probably not exist in that form, but it's a well known one which makes it easier to use it for the discussion - indeed I think it says a lot about that railway that it's even profitable! I reckon in Germany you'd have a Hazel Grove circular taking in the station timed to meet the trains, similar at Stockport and say a Levvy or Heaton Chapel-Manchester local bus service)

 

[cnjb8]

It was introduced well before the Robin Hood Energy business and I believe is earmarked for transport.

Yes you are correct,it's worked evidently as Birmingham are looking at a similar scheme

No, they are owned by the operators which is why you will have depots in rather close proximity to one another from different firms.

That is true but by the same token, there's no real indication of any quality service. Why sit on even a new bus if it's still stuck in traffic? These things have to go together - improve bus priority so travel times are competitive and reliability is assured, have modern comfortable vehicles, and remove some of the things that make car use easy. Imagine if Manchester City Council (with TfGM) had reduced the number of on-street car parking spaces by 5% a year?




The thing is, many locations already have buses connecting with trams.

Eccles, Oldham, Rochdale, Altrincham, Bury, Whitefield..... the list goes on. The issue on a number of lines and their location is that the tramline follows the rail alignment so they're not always easy to service the intermediate points so places like Prestwich are a 5 min divert off the main road and round the shops and back out, or Pomona which is on an island almost, and then Trafford Bar which is also tucked away. I confess I'm less familiar with stuff on the east side.

Why are TfGM getting fussed about purchasing the depots then?

 

[Megafuss]

Yes you are correct,it's worked evidently as Birmingham are looking at a similar scheme

Why are TfGM getting fussed about purchasing the depots then?

Because they want to make it easier for new entrants

 

[domcoop7]

Yes you are correct,it's worked evidently as Birmingham are looking at a similar scheme

Why are TfGM getting fussed about purchasing the depots then?

Birmingham:- Yes, I looked at the quality partnership (which is the route they're going down albeit only on one corridor for now). They've specified dual door buses accepting smart touch-in ticketing must be offered on that route (Walsall to Brum I think?).

TfGM:- They say the depots are being purchased so that it enables large groups to bid even if they don't already have a depot in the area. But for reasons said by many above, it doesn't really make that much (or indeed any) sense. And they appear to have rolled back a bit from it. Maybe they have designs on letting the private sector have a go for a few years, and then running the whole thing in house once its been bedded in (considerably easier if they own the depots). Also makes it more difficult to reverse should a new central government change their mind, I suppose.

 

[cnjb8]

Because they want to make it easier for new entrants

Ah ok thank you.

Birmingham:- Yes, I looked at the quality partnership (which is the route they're going down albeit only on one corridor for now). They've specified dual door buses accepting smart touch-in ticketing must be offered on that route (Walsall to Brum I think?).

TfGM:- They say the depots are being purchased so that it enables large groups to bid even if they don't already have a depot in the area. But for reasons said by many above, it doesn't really make that much (or indeed any) sense. And they appear to have rolled back a bit from it. Maybe they have designs on letting the private sector have a go for a few years, and then running the whole thing in house once its been bedded in (considerably easier if they own the depots). Also makes it more difficult to reverse should a new central government change their mind, I suppose.

The Birmingham thing was about the parking levy which is my bad for quoting weirdly, but that is certainly interesting to know

 

[Bletchleyite]

Birmingham:- Yes, I looked at the quality partnership (which is the route they're going down albeit only on one corridor for now). They've specified dual door buses accepting smart touch-in ticketing must be offered on that route (Walsall to Brum I think?).

TfGM:- They say the depots are being purchased so that it enables large groups to bid even if they don't already have a depot in the area. But for reasons said by many above, it doesn't really make that much (or indeed any) sense. And they appear to have rolled back a bit from it. Maybe they have designs on letting the private sector have a go for a few years, and then running the whole thing in house once its been bedded in (considerably easier if they own the depots). Also makes it more difficult to reverse should a new central government change their mind, I suppose.

I'd be surprised if they were looking to run in-house - Metrolink is still tendered out, isn't it? They don't choose to run that themselves.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

One is to thin the stops a bit (in Germany they are typically about every 500m, in the UK often every 200m or even closer).

If that is such a good idea, why not be open about it and make it headlines in the "Metro" and a source of discussion on the local area television stations. Let the people who will be affected by this idea have their say on the matter.

I'd be surprised if they were looking to run in-house - Metrolink is still tendered out, isn't it? They don't choose to run that themselves.

What is going to happen to the Leigh Guided Busway services under this new franchising fait accompli, that being an original GMPTE/TfGM project in lieu of a rail link?

 

[Gareth]

Yes. Like diverting into all the estates, it's a trade off between attracting people out of cars and providing accessibility to those of limited mobility. You effectively can't do both with the same bus. What you can do, I suppose, is to have something like the 192 run all stops from Hazel Grove to Stockport then call at only a few key stops on the way into Manchester, with a separate Stockport-Manchester service picking up the local stops. I guess that isn't seen as commercially viable, but that's one of the flaws in things being decided simply on how Stagecoach can make the most money out of a given vehicle and driver - a 45 minute bus ride for a journey that can easily be driven in under 30 minutes simply isn't attractive to a car driver.

(I know the 192 is probably a bad-ish example because it completely duplicates the railway as far as Levenshulme station and so in Germany would probably not exist in that form, but it's a well known one which makes it easier to use it for the discussion - indeed I think it says a lot about that railway that it's even profitable! I reckon in Germany you'd have a Hazel Grove circular taking in the station timed to meet the trains, similar at Stockport and say a Levvy or Heaton Chapel-Manchester local bus service)

It does seem too many bus services try to do both. The 61 in Liverpool (Bootle-Aigburth) is one of these. I'm not sure you can even blame deregulation for it as I think it has always had a meandering tendancy. One annoying dogleg is going through Old Swan. At rush hour, this takes an age, as Old Swan is rammed most times of the day anyway. They've now stopped doing this during rush hour but that's another pet peeve of mine - bus services that operate differently depending on time of day.

Just going straight up Queens Drive is much quicker. You can walk to the centre of Old Swan from there in 5-10 minutes. Or you just jump the 10, which is one of the most frequent services in the city.

Taggart Avenue is the other big dogleg. It should just go down the drive and be done with it.

 

[dm1]

If that is such a good idea, why not be open about it and make it headlines in the "Metro" and a source of discussion on the local area television stations. Let the people who will be affected by this idea have their say on the matter.

In time that is no doubt a discussion that needs to take place, but it's once again a case of tragedy of the commons. Everyone wants to have a stop as near to them as possible, but stop nowhere en route until their destination. Those two wishes are in direct conflict, therefore whenever you modify the stop spacing there will be winners and losers, but the losers will almost always shout louder. It is then the task of TfGM to weigh up the benefit for everyone and decide what to do. In many cases increasing the stop spacing slightly will benefit more people throigh shorter journeys, even if they have to walk slightly further to their stop.

If dwell times at stops are really as long as suggested up-thread, then cutting that down through off-board ticketing will speed up journeys significantly and reduce costs - and this is also something more difficult to organise outside a municipally-controlled system.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If that is such a good idea, why not be open about it and make it headlines in the "Metro" and a source of discussion on the local area television stations. Let the people who will be affected by this idea have their say on the matter.

If they've got any sense they will basically regulate with the system roughly as it is, and then propose a progressive series of changes and improvements which could be subject to such discussion. There are dangers in doing too much at once.

What is going to happen to the Leigh Guided Busway services under this new franchising fait accompli, that being an original GMPTE/TfGM project in lieu of a rail link?

It's already contracted so I guess it will stay that way.

 

[Llandudno]

What are the chances many of the new bus routes will be revised to connect with the tram lines?

For this to happen Metrolink may have to produce actual timetables!

 

[telstarbox]

Cheap parking is less an issue in central Manchester than it was 10 years ago, when you could park for £3 a day on various dodgy scraps of land just off the Mancunian Way. A lot of these sites have been developed now. I don't know what the situation is in Oldham or Rochdale.

 

[WatcherZero]

It had one, Manchester Community Transport. It held many TfGM contracts, and though briefly taken under the umbrella of HCT Group (parent of CT Plus, Libertybus, its Guernsey equivalent, Bristol CT, CT Plus Yorkshire and Powells in South Yorkshire) was a commercial failure and shut down in April 2020. Plenty of info by googling it.

Yes had been going 30 years, seemed to have been killed off by the decline in ring and ride service contracts as being one of the most expensive forms of public transport (Ive seen £10+ per journey average operating costs at some of them) they were among the first on the chopping block around the country when bus subsidy budgets were squeezed during austerity.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If they've got any sense they will basically regulate with the system roughly as it is, and then propose a progressive series of changes and improvements which could be subject to such discussion. There are dangers in doing too much at once.

Do bus shelters need planning permission from the local authority?

 

[Man of Kent]

Do bus shelters need planning permission from the local authority?

Only if they have advertising. Otherwise it is permitted development, though it still requires the permission of the highway authority.

 

[domcoop7]

It does seem too many bus services try to do both. The 61 in Liverpool (Bootle-Aigburth) is one of these. I'm not sure you can even blame deregulation for it as I think it has always had a meandering tendancy. One annoying dogleg is going through Old Swan. At rush hour, this takes an age, as Old Swan is rammed most times of the day anyway. They've now stopped doing this during rush hour but that's another pet peeve of mine - bus services that operate differently depending on time of day.

Just going straight up Queens Drive is much quicker. You can walk to the centre of Old Swan from there in 5-10 minutes. Or you just jump the 10, which is one of the most frequent services in the city.

Taggart Avenue is the other big dogleg. It should just go down the drive and be done with it.

Shiel Road circular is another one that seems to take an age to get nowhere!

Liverpool is a city that still has higher than average bus usage and wide radial routes (due mostly to them having used to have tram lines down the middle) once you get out of the centre.

It's also an example of bizarre bus priority measures, like bus lanes that start in the middle of nowhere and then end 10 metres later still in the middle of nowhere. A rare good example is the traffic light on Picton Road at the railway bridge coming out of town. It allowed buses to move ahead of long tailbacks past a narrow section. But that's a rarity, most of them are pretty useless. And to top it off, Big Joe de-restricted most of the bus lanes.

 

[47550]

Yes you are correct,it's worked evidently as Birmingham are looking at a similar scheme

Why are TfGM getting fussed about purchasing the depots then?

I never understood the logic for buying the depots. Potentially you can end up with more than one operator wanting to use the depot (if different operators win a big contract and a little contract in the same area). So this would raise complications of who do the engineers work for / who owns the spares etc / who gets space in the workshop etc. Better to leave the existing operators to own their own depots. Yes it gives the incumbent an advantage in the main tender for their own area - but they already have that advantage with route knowledge.

 

[Gareth]

@domcoop7

A lot of weird decisions like that are due to the council unlocking grants from central government. That's also why we have weird cycle lanes that can appear out of nowhere and disappear just as fast. It's toy town administration.

 

[Goldfish62]

Actually, TfL do own some depots and lease them out to operators. I believe the list is Ash Grove, Brixton Tramshed, Edgware, Fulwell, Twickenham, Walworth, West Ham and Uxbridge.

I think that's the full list! Fulwell is the Abellio bit, not the RATP bit.

I never understood the logic for buying the depots. Potentially you can end up with more than one operator wanting to use the depot (if different operators win a big contract and a little contract in the same area). So this would raise complications of who do the engineers work for / who owns the spares etc / who gets space in the workshop etc. Better to leave the existing operators to own their own depots. Yes it gives the incumbent an advantage in the main tender for their own area - but they already have that advantage with route knowledge.

That's not been shown to be an issue in London with Ash Grove. TfL owns the depot and Arriva and HCT Group share it.

 

[Rod Harrison]

The whole franchising thing seems to be based on the 1970s when bus usage, and traffic levels were completely different. Car ownership is significantly higher and, thanks to the ongoing pandemic, many people, and firms, will want home working to continue. Whilst the latter may reduce traffic levels it will reduce the number of people wanting to give up their cars. With the best will in the world most people have at least 100 yards (160 metres for younger subscribers) to walk to a bus stop which almost certainly will not go where they want and will require a walk or another journey. Franchising won’t change this and I wouldn’t catch a bus, even if it was being heavily subsidised by the poor bloody motorist, if I had a car which would take me quicker and easier to my place of work or leisure. Furthermore, more and more places of employment, retail and leisure are located out of town centres. If the routes are wrong why pay millions when they can just use current regulations to improve the current services. Just don’t get it. Fortunately I’m not a Greater Manchester taxpayer though one of my daughters and one granddaughter are both going to have to pay for this.