Transport needs are localising, so should our transport services and infrastructure

Have you changed where you get your hair cut? your dentist? your frequent mid-week lunch spots?

Chances are that if you have, you have moved these activities to be closer to home, and away from your office.

Evidence suggests that the increased localisation of business and leisure outside of city centres, a trend catalysed by COVID, is here to stay.

When measured against a pre-COVID baseline, Google Mobility data showed that in Jun-Oct 2022 (before they stopped sharing the data), activity at retail / recreation locations in Outer London boroughs was c.15ppt higher than those in Inner London boroughs.

Similarly, Pret’s transaction index in Jan-Apr 2023 showed that sales at Pret’s London “Suburban” outlets were 24ppt higher than its London “City Worker” outlets, and 18ppt higher than its London “West End” outlets against respective pre-COVID baselines.

In response to this shift in demand patterns, F&B (e.g., Pret and Gail’s) and retail (e.g., Lidl) businesses are expanding in the suburbs away from city centres.

?

Impact on transport usage patterns and modes

Travel demand is shifting from the traditional “radial” pattern between the urban core and suburban residential areas to localised, shorter-distance travel patterns within and between suburbs.

This can be observed somewhat through recent London Underground usage data, which shows station entries / exits for suburban stations having recovered more strongly than city centre stations when compared against a pre-COVID baseline.

The shift towards localised intra-suburban travel has implications for our transport infrastructure and fundamentally changes what we need to be focusing on.

A pessimist may think that this hands a big advantage to private car use vs public transport due to the flexibility of being able to drive a car wherever you want to go.

However, traditional modes are fighting back where they can (for example London’s 'Superloop’ buses improving the connection between suburbs in outer London) and there are new, innovative models of transport which are well suited to this new ‘web’ of travel demand. These include:

Demand-responsive transit (DRT)

A bus dynamically develops a route based on the pick-up and drop-off locations designated by its passengers through app bookings.

This nimble mode of transportation can adapt on-the-go to fulfil the varying needs for intra-suburb travel.

There are examples of live DRT services across the UK and around the world . West Midlands Bus on Demand was launched to provide flexible transportation options in areas with lower demand or limited access to regular bus services. Passengers can book rides on-demand through a mobile app or by phone, and the service aims to optimise routes based on passenger demand to improve efficiency.

Shared micromobility – e-scooter and e-bike fleets

Micromobility modes, (e-scooter and e-bike sharing services), whilst not loved by all, have grown significantly in recent years.

The offering by private providers such as Tier and Lime have increasingly matured, and whilst they face increased regulation there has been significant progress in the development of best practices with regards to fleet operations.

New travel patterns in suburbs are well-served by shared micromobility, with the ability for users to go wherever they want to - so long as there is sufficient volume of trips to provide good asset utilization.

?

Shared, floating hire cars

Free-floating car sharing schemes provide very short term one-way car hire. ZipCar Flex in London has been integrated with Citymapper since 2019, so if you find yourself trying to get from Dulwich to Crystal Palace it may suggest hiring a shared electric Zipcar at ￡4.10 for 15mins to drive yourself (much more attractive than the PT alternative).

ZipCar Flex covers 15 London boroughs, and in Hamburg Share Now and Sixt cover almost the entire city. Operations in suburbs where transport demand is more distributed (rather than radial) is more suitable for free floating schemes with reduced need for rebalancing of the fleet.

The flexibility of this model, enabling users to go wherever they wish is well suited to the new distributed nature of demand.

?

Implications for policy makers and transport infrastructure

Policy makers must embrace the new models of transportation that are better suited to the needs of customers, and rethink their investment priorities:

1.???? Supporting DRT with funding beyond pilots, incl. developing commercially viable models with sufficient scale, and new models to support economics (e.g., merging with special needs transport services - as has been trialed in Coventry)

2.???? Allowing (and supporting) micro mobility providers and shared car schemes to flourish

3.???? Modifying suburban streets to enable improved usage by cyclists and scooters. For example providing new cycle routes focused on suburbs? (e.g., Outer London Cycleways 11, 48, and 49)

4.???? Continuing to adapt the legacy transport networks to better suit changing travel patterns. This could include more frequent stops and changes to routes to focus on intra-suburban travel

There are also implications and opportunities presented for infrastructure investment:

1.???? New fleet ownership opportunities in fleets of smaller vehicles (e.g. DRT minibuses and shared use cars)

2.???? Ownership of Micromobility infrastructure – as micromobility continues to expand there are opportunities to own a city’s?ebikes or escooters and docking stations. (e.g., Lyfts micromobility business rumoured to be for sale with a range of operation contracts across US cities).

3.???? A shift in which car parking assets may be most valuable with a move in demand away from large city centre locations, to more localised, smaller car parking facilities.

?

?

?