To receive the above presentation.

Members received a presentation on Arriva Click Demand Responsive ‘Corner to Corner’ transport from Simon Mathieson, Business Development Manager at Arriva.

Mr Mathieson explained that Arriva had been piloting a ‘corner to corner’ demand responsive bus service in Sittingbourne, Kent since March 2017. The pilot had been successful and popular. Arriva had big ambitions to develop the service elsewhere and had recently ordered 35 more vehicles to enable this to happen. Members noted that Arriva was a pan-European transport company owned by Deustche Bahn since 2010. Arriva was aware that local authorities were facing cuts to budgets, increased demand for social transport, falling passenger numbers, increased congestion and concerns over air quality.

The demand responsive bus scheme helped to address some of the issues as it aggregated people travelling from multiple origins to multiple destinations in an efficient and convenient way. The automated system matched journeys and adjusted routes. There was no manual intervention required, but back office back up was available if needed.  Algorithms were used to ensure optimal routes were chosen within built–in parameters. In Sittingbourne routes were never more than 20% away from the direct route.  The 16-seater vehicles were high specification and could be configured in various ways. The vehicles used in Sittingbourne were 10 seater plus space for one wheelchair. The technology was able to teach itself demand patterns so an unbooked bus would be sent to the position nearest the next likely booking. The offer was a 20 minute window for collection; in Sittingbourne average waits were 10-11 minutes. Customers were able to book a ride via an app or by telephone or website. Journeys could be purchased via credit, on a pay as you go basis, or via a season ticket. Once booked, customers received details of the vehicle and driver who would pick them up, including a direct telephone number, along with journey details. Customers could cancel bookings before pick up at no cost. Mr Mathieson highlighted elements of the customer proposition including convenience, quality, accessibility, safety, shareability and excellent customer service.

Members noted that demand responsive services could be used in a number of environments including urban areas and also where services had traditionally been subsidised because of low demand. Members noted the growth in the Sittingbourne pilot, which was now achieving over 2000 rides per week. Via the usage of the app, Arriva was able to obtain instantaneous and very detailed data, which was used to improve the service and manage driver and vehicle resourcing. It was noted that the proportion of people using the service in Sittingbourne for their daily commute had reduced over time, with increased use for leisure, shopping and visiting friends and family. The data also showed that 30% of respondents had shifted from using their car. Therefore people previously not willing or able to use public transport were using the service.

Councillor Bicknell joined the meeting at 7.02pm.

Councillor Sharma commented that he had asked about on-demand buses at the UK Bus Summit four years previously, but the idea had not been taken seriously. He was pleased that the Managing Director of Arriva was supportive and wanted to drive the bus market into a revolutionary area. Mr Mathieson confirmed that current legislation allowed for on-demand services to operate without additional licences. As a bus service rather than a private hire operator, the service could take concessionary passes and receive the fuel subsidy.

Hugh Wilding, Headteacher at Claires Court School asked whether a service for Maidenhead could be extended out to Cippenham where a number of his staff lived.

Mr Mathieson responded that the model and zone used would be informed by stakeholders; if demand was clear then it could be included in the zone. The service was not restricted by, for example, borough boundaries. Darren Gotch, Traffic Engineer commented that the borough was already discussing options with Slough. Mr Mathieson confirmed that there was no issue with the buses going onto private land, such as a school property. Detours at certain times of day could be considered to meet specific demand.  Trips could be pre-booked up to one month in advance and employers could bulk book for staff. If there was sufficient demand, a vehicle could be block booked for one destination.

Olu Odeniyi, President of Maidenhead Chamber of Commerce, asked whether a business or organisation such as an industrial estate could buy passes for staff. Mr Mathieson explained that this was straightforward. A company could set up a direct debit or buy long-term passes and give staff or visitors a promo-code to use. The 20 minute wait window could be flexed by the level of demand. 15 minute slots could be pre-booked to minimise latency. Some services may require a subsidy, for example to a business park until patronage increased and the service became commercially viable. Borough traffic models would be used to identify travel demands.

Hugh Wilding explained that he had held discussions over the summer with another operator about a bespoke schools service. In discussions relating to safeguarding it had become clear that although drivers were CRB checked, back office staff were not and this would be an issue.

Mr Mathieson commented that it was too early to determine if the service in Sittingbourne had had a significant impact on traffic flows, but it was not necessarily the ideal place to model the service. Key factors for an ideal model would be more leisure services and a major hospital within the zone. He explained that the Sittingbourne service was on the right trajectory to break even within 12 months. The average fare was slightly lower than hoped however this was likely a result of free rides, flat rates and credit sharing that had been given to encourage demand at the start. The fare was pitched between a bus and a taxi at approximately £1 per mile. The fare price did not change based on number of users; yield management was not allowed under the regulations. If demand increased beyond the 16 seater vehicle for a route, the preference would be for more vehicles rather than larger vehicle.

Councillor Bicknell commented that traditionally bus providers were reluctant to share data about commercial routes, particularly if they were deemed unviable. Mr Mathieson stated that Arriva was committed to open data and would be prepared to share data with borough traffic engineers. A potential zone for Maidenhead would be larger than the current zone in Sittingbourne, therefore would require more vehicles.  He confirmed that the app complied with GDPR regulations. Arriva took customer data very seriously and worked with the app developer Via in this respect. All data was stored on an Amazon server.

The Chairman thanked Mr Mathieson for his presentation.

The clerk was asked to add the presentation slides to the agenda page on the borough website.