comhairle cathrach chorcai cork city council 8/9 th february 2007 1 the rural transport initiative...

Comhairle Cathrach ChorcaiCork City Council8/9th February 2007

1

THE RURAL TRANSPORT INITIATIVE (RTI) IN IRELAND – HISTORY, KEY RESULTS AND NEW DIRECTIONS

Niall Crosbie

Fitzpatrick Associates, Economic Consultants


STRUCTURE OF PRESENTATION

PART 1

Background and Study Objectives

PART 2

Rural Transport/RTI Experience

PART 3

RuralTransportIssues, Options, Proposals

2


PART 1

Background

and Study

Objectives

3


POLICY BACKGROUND

4

• Individual pilot projects under 1994-99 Local Development Programme

• 2002 – Inter-departmental Committee on Rural Public Transport and National

Rural Transport Survey

• 2000-06 – Pilot Rural Transport Initiative 2002-06

• Announcement that rural public transport was to be put on a “permanent

footing” from 2007


WHAT THE MINISTER ANNOUNCED

• Put the RTI on a “permanent footing”

• Spending c €18 mn when rolled out

• A “phased roll-out”

• Build on the RTI

• National coverage

• Action in 2007

5


STUDY TERMS OF REFERENCE

6

• Identify options for Rural Public Transport Policy

• Allow for “progressive roll-out”

• Provide case for and against each option

• Select a preferred option (consultants’ preference)


PART 2

Rural Transport/RTI

Experience

7


COMPONENTS OF THE RURAL TRANSPORT SYSTEM

Type Main Parameters Providers

Conventional (“Connect”)

Services on important routes traversing rural areas and linking to and between urban centres.

Bus Ėireann, Irish Rail, private transport operators.

Non-conventional (“Collect”)

Collecting rural residents and bringing them to service centres or conventional public transport hubs.

On demand/semi-scheduled services, provided by taxis, hackneys, public service providers (e.g. HSE), community and voluntary sector, school transport.

8

High Pop Density

Low PopDensity


IRELAND’S DEMOGRAPHIC AND SPATIAL CONTEXT

• 40% of the population in rural areas, i.e. settlements of <1,500 (1.6 mn)

• Population density low, and highly dispersed

• Considerable local diversity in population

• Rural population up to 75%-80% of total in some counties

• Changing population patterns up to 2021 – age, gender

• Projected increase in numbers of older people

9


RURAL PUBLIC TRANSPORT IN IRELAND

• Network of extensive but low frequency scheduled rural services

• Indirect contribution from major inter-urban services

• Development of non-conventional rural services via RTI

• Private hire transport in rural areas, e.g. taxis and hackneys

• School bus system important specialist service

• Other rural transport for specialist purposes, e.g. health, C+V

10


“SNAPSHOT” OF THE RTI GROUPS

11

Low High Average Total RTI income (€)* 50,929 466,727 124,753 3,742,599 Total public income (€)* 59,534 565,313 172,476 5,174,291 Total income (€)* 72,731 639,405 205,025 6,150,759 Services (No) 191 7,392 2,193 74,584 Passenger journeys (No) 5,295 58,090 19,156 651,316 Users(No) Est. 35,000 * Based on responses of 30 RTI groups.


RTI GROUPS – SERVICES

• All but one county at least partially covered

• Service levels vary within RTI areas

• Users mainly older people – 63% are FTP passengers

• More than 70% of FTP passengers are female

• Groups also serve wider target groups

• Personal business, shopping, social/leisure – main journey purposes

• Destinations generally local – little need for links to scheduled services?

12


13


RTI GROUPS – STRUCTURES AND LINKS

• Mainly existing local development groups and/or newly formed groups

• Mainly limited companies with charitable status

• Boards representing a mix of interests

14

Community/Users 30%

Local Authority/CDB 10%

Voluntary Organisations 30%

Health Service Executive 7%

LEADER/Partnerships 15% Transport Providers 4%


PART 3

15

Issues

and

Options


KEY COMPONENTS OF A “NATIONAL RURAL TRANSPORT POLICY”

16

Target groups, objectives, service

Service types, vehicles

Local management/delivery

Higher-level oversight, management

Resources, funding

Performance management, monitoring


LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE RTI

17

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

• pioneered door-to-door services

• huge benefits for users

• benefits for other service providers

• good at serving main existing group

• extensive geographical coverage

• a lot of learning on ground

• only part of the rural transport issue

• regulatory gaps continue

• patchy coverage in existing areas

• absence of area-based transport plans

• governance/reporting in some groups

• systematic overall information needed


OPTIONS FOR A RURAL PUBLIC TRANSPORT POLICY

1. Existing Target Groups 2. Wider Target Groups 3. Wider Rural Public Transport Services

Target Groups

As per the existing RTI’s coverage of key target groups

Wider coverage in practice for all excluded groups, including older people, people on low incomes, people with mobility, sensory and cognitive impairments, young people

Widest target group coverage of the various options, to include all potential rural transport users, e.g. including travel for work

Service Types

Mainly non-conventional services, including semi-scheduled and fully demand-responsive services, mainly day-time services

Also mainly semi-scheduled and fully demand-responsive services, but with more scope for scheduled services than under Option 1, mainly day-time services but also some morning and evening services based on wider target group needs

More varied mix of scheduled, semi-scheduled and fully demand-responsive services, with services spread across morning, day-time and evening

Vehicle Types

Mainly using minibuses, taxis, hackneys and private cars

Mainly using minibuses, taxis, hackneys and private cars

Use of a full range of available vehicle types, including cars, taxis, hackneys and minibuses for non-conventional services as well as larger coaches for conventional scheduled services

OperatorsOperated mainly by small private operators and the community and voluntary sector

Operated mainly by small private operators and the community and voluntary sector

Operated by a mix of small private operators, larger commercial/ scheduled operators (both public and private) and the community and voluntary sector

18


PROPOSED OPTION

19

• Option 2 in shorter-term, move towards Option 3

• Retain focus on exclusion in all options

• Roll out via mix of:

– existing groups

– existing groups expanded

– new groups (limited number, relatively large, not greenfield)

• All groups must meet governance/reporting/accountability

• County boundaries desirable

• Enhanced central support via Pobal

• More co-operation with local bodies

• Give impetus to local integrated transport planning


WIDER ISSUES – DIRECTLY AFFECTING OPTION 2 ROLL-OUT

• Bus regulatory situation – affects fare-paying

• FTP post RTI

• Insurance for “voluntary” cars, brokerage

• Displacement of scheduled services – must be monitored centrally

• Voluntary contribution generally

• Funding from other sources

• Link to school bus system

20


OTHER ISSUES

• Link to health services/voluntary sector

• Vehicle standards/accessibility

• Cross-border services with N. Ireland/cross-boundary in Ireland

• IT – needs larger structures involved (national or area-based)

• Area-based accessibility type planning

21


TOWARDS OPTION 3 – NECESSARY PRE-CONDITIONS

… clearer national policy objectives/service standards

… clearer framework of conventional/non-conventional services

… policy on public transport service subvention

… regulatory environment clearer

… integrate transport and spatial planning

22

comhairle cathrach chorcai cork city council 8/9 th february 2007 1 the rural transport initiative...

Documents

rural transport system

rural transport issues

rural transport rti

rural transport initiative

rural public transport

rural areas

rural transportrti experience

study objectives