Ealing Car Club Study

Transcription

1 Ealing Car Club Study London Borough of Ealing Draft Report February 2015 Our ref: Client ref: JB

2

3 Ealing Car Club Study London Borough of Ealing Draft Report February 2015 Our ref: Client ref: JB Prepared by: Prepared for: Steer Davies Gleave Upper Ground London SE1 9PD London Borough of Ealing Ealing Council Perceval House Uxbridge Road Ealing W5 2HL Steer Davies Gleave has prepared this work for London Borough of Ealing. This work may only be used within the context and scope of work for which Steer Davies Gleave was commissioned and may not be relied upon in part or whole by any third party or be used for any other purpose. Any person choosing to use any part of this work without the express and written permission of Steer Davies Gleave shall be deemed to confirm their agreement to indemnify Steer Davies Gleave for all loss or damage resulting therefrom. Steer Davies Gleave has prepared this work using professional practices and procedures using information available to it at the time and as such any new information could alter the validity of the results and conclusions made.

4 Contents Executive Summary... i Overview... i 1 Introduction... 1 Background to the study... 1 Car clubs in London: recent developments Method... 3 Study tasks... 3 Structure of the report Car clubs in Ealing: existing situation... 4 Existing car club provision: how Ealing compares... 8 Utilisation analysis Understanding potential for car clubs Assessing potential for further growth Car clubs in WestTrans boroughs The views of operators Introduction Content of structured interviews Current operations Car club policies Future operations The views of developers Method Future options for car clubs in Ealing Future scenarios workshop Analysis of Scenarios Recommendations Introduction Recommendations February 2015

5 Figures Figure 3.1: Car club cars in Ealing - January 2012 to June 2014 (all operators)... 4 Figure 3.2: Car club members in Ealing - January 2012 to June Figure 3.3: Annual car club growth 2012 to 2014: Ealing vs Greater London... 6 Figure 3.4: Car club locations... 7 Figure 3.5: Car club members per head of population: Outer London boroughs... 8 Figure 3.6: Car club members per head of population: all London boroughs... 9 Figure 3.7: Utilisation of car club bays Figure 3.8: Car ownership before and after joining a car club Figure 3.9: Frequency of use of other modes: Ealing members Figure 3.10: Frequency of use of other modes: Outer London members Figure 4.1: PTAL of Ealing Figure 4.2: Mosaic Groups in Ealing Figure 4.3: Propensity to become car club member by Mosaic group Figure 4.4: Mosaic Groups within Ealing Figure 4.5: Population density of Ealing (2014) and development site allocations of over two hectares Figure 4.6: Projected population density of Ealing (2031) and development site allocations of over two hectares Figure 4.7: Travel to work by car Figure 4.8: Controlled Parking Zones in Ealing Figure 4.9: Percentage of households with no car access by ward Figure 4.10: Percentage of households owning two or more cars By ward Figure 7.1: Projected potential car club car growth by scenario Figure 7.2: Projected potential car club member growth by scenario Tables Table 3.1: Car club cars and utilisation by ward Figure 3.2: Frequency of mode use by car club members compared with the general population February 2015

6 Table 4.1: Data sources reviewed and relevance to car club demand Table 4.2: Description of City Prosperity and Urban Cohesion groups Table 4.3: Car clubs in WestTrans boroughs Table 7.1: Assessment of Scenarios by Borough Objectives Table 7.2: Projected car club cars and members by scenario Table 8.1: Projected Investment Fund Required for Discounted Bay Fees Appendices Appendix A Car club operator questionnaire February 2015

7 Executive Summary Overview This study, commissioned by the London Borough of Ealing (LBE), aims to identify ways in which car clubs may develop in the borough in future years. A particular focus was to understand the potential for different models of car club provision in the borough and how LBE might support that provision. Existing situation The study found that, compared to Greater London as a whole, car club membership numbers in Ealing have grown at a faster rate in recent years with an 28% annual growth rate from in Ealing compared to 11% in London. The number of cars in Ealing is also growing faster than in London. Provision of car club bays in Ealing (2.8 per 10,000 residents) is almost three times higher than the Outer London average (1 per 10,000) and in line with the Greater London average of 2.8. Car club provision is predominantly in the east of the borough which has characteristics of inner London boroughs: higher population density, good public transport links, significant pressure for residential parking, lower car ownership and a low level of car use for commuting. Geodemographic profiling of Ealing found 73% of the population falls into two Mosaic groups: City Prosperity and Urban Cohesion. City Prosperity (32% of the borough population) are well paid, young or middle aged professionals in the east of the borough who are most likely to use car clubs. Urban Cohesion (41% of the population) are home owners with extended families, predominantly of South East Asian origin in the west of the borough who are currently unlikely to use car clubs. It should be noted that use of car clubs by these groups also largely reflects low levels of current car club provision. Car clubs in Ealing help to reduce the number of cars on the road. More than half of Ealing members (54%) owned at least one car before joining the car club and this fell to 24% after joining. 37% of Ealing members stated that they would have bought a car if they had not joined the car club and 20% had already sold or disposed of a car before joining. Compared to the average Londoner, car club members in Ealing make three times more bicycle journeys, twice as many Underground journeys and half as many private car journeys. Potential growth The study shows potential for increasing car club provision in other parts of the borough, particularly around Southall where new housing developments, enhanced public transport provision through Crossrail and higher population densities offer a potential car club market. Multiple or single operator models Car club operators and developers interviewed as part of this study all expressed a preference for multiple car club operators in Ealing. This is in line with the draft Car Club Strategy for London which notes that competition between operators can help consolidate networks and expand options for customers and developers. Car club operators suggested lower permit fees as an incentive to commence operations in the north and west of Ealing where they currently perceive that there are lower levels of demand. February 2015 i

8 Recommendations The car club market in London is dynamic and subject to considerable change over time. These recommendations are based on information currently available and are valid at the time of reporting (January 2015). We recommend LBE should keep these recommendations under review, keep up to date with developments and create relationships with new providers. 1. Support the growth of back to base car clubs in the following ways: Offer differential pricing for permits across the borough to incentivise car club operators to introduce vehicles in a wider range of locations, particularly to the west and north of the borough. This could be through a time limited discounted permit, or differential pricing for permits, e.g. based on Underground Zones Allow a wider range of back-to-base car club operator to operate on street to provide greater borough-wide car club coverage and over time, a greater provision of car club vehicles for local residents. Package new bays in established car club locations with new locations. Offering operators packages of car club bays, which would include bays both within the core car club market in eastern Ealing and the new potential markets in the west would commit operators to expansion into the west. Work with agencies in western Ealing to develop a new car club market. LBE should liaise with car club operators, community groups, social housing providers and local businesses to develop a car club offer that appeals to the Urban Cohesion groups present in western Ealing. 2. Explore a joint approach to one-way and point-to-point car clubs across WestTrans boroughs. It is recommended that WestTrans co-ordinates this. 3. Quantify the potential benefits of growth in car clubs to encourage political buy-in to expanding car clubs more widely across the borough in terms of: Numbers of cars removed from the road; Reduction in car travel; Increase in travel by more sustainable modes; and Reductions in vehicle emissions. 4. Incorporate the actions contained within the draft TfL Car Club Strategy into its working practices, in particular : Lobbying key stakeholders to support car clubs; Helping Londoners make the switch from private cars (through incentives and parking permit schemes); Participating in the making parking management smarter and easier working group; Driving the uptake of low emission vehicles by identifying Electric Vehicle charging points; Working with operators to improve bay signage and promotion; and Working with local business organisations and car club operators to promote car clubs for business travel. February 2015 ii

9 1 Introduction Background to the study 1.1 Steer Davies Gleave was commissioned by London Borough of Ealing (LBE) to undertake this study of car clubs in Ealing in October Car clubs are well established in the borough. In 2014, Ealing has three car club operators, Zipcar, City Car Club and Hertz 24/7. Car club provision has grown rapidly since 2008 from 13 bays to 94 bays to 2014, a 700% increase. This ranks as the second highest level of growth in Outer London. 1.3 The main planning tools used by Ealing Borough Council to secure car club bays and vehicles and to promote car club use in new developments are Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD), individual Section 106 agreements and conditions on planning consents. Aside from these agreements, car club growth has been market driven: operators have established operations according based on their assessment of market demand and LBE has facilitated this through provision of bays. 1.4 The car club sector in London continues to grow rapidly, with a number of new types of car club coming into the market (as described below). Through this study LBE wish to understand ways in which car club provision in the borough might expand in the future, and how the Council can best support car club growth. Car clubs in London: recent developments Back-to-base car clubs 1.5 Back-to-base car clubs represent the traditional car club model. The majority of car club growth seen in London has been in the form of back-to-base car clubs. In back-to-base car clubs, cars are located at on-street (provided by local authorities) or off-street bays (in private car parks and developments). At the end of the hire period, users must return the car to bay they picked it up from. 1.6 In London the current operators of back-to-base car clubs are Zipcar, City Car Club, Hertz 24/7 and E-Car (see below). Co-Wheels, a car club run as a social enterprise that operates elsewhere in the UK, does not currently operate in London but may enter the market in coming years. icar, a local car rental company is also exploring entering the car club market. Electric car clubs 1.7 E-Car, a back-to-base operator of Electric Vehicles (EVs), launched the UK s first all-electric car club in London and currently have locations in London, the south east, the midlands and are February

10 expanding their operations. Operationally E-Car follows a similar model to traditional back-tobase car clubs, with dedicated car club bays (and charging facilities) required. 1.8 Bolloré group have taken over responsibility for the Source London electric vehicle charging network and plan to launch an EV only point-to-point car club in London during the coming year. Bolloré operates the Autolib point-to-point car club in Paris. One-way car clubs 1.9 Whilst the back-to-base model continues to expand in London, the launch of DriveNow provides residents in Islington, Hackney and Haringey with cars that can be used for one-way journeys and left in any permitted parking space within the zone of operation. Users are charged by the minute and the operator has negotiated borough-wide parking permits. There is typically no requirement for dedicated car club bays for the one-way car club model. Vehicles are currently a mixture of petrol and diesel vehicles, although there are plans for EV vehicles to be introduced in Ford has recently launched a small pilot of Go!Drive, a one-way car club, from two locations in central London. Car2Go, a one-way car club from Mercedes-Benz was previously introduced in Islington and a number of south London boroughs, although this has now been withdrawn. Peer-to-peer car clubs 1.11 Peer-to-peer car club operator Easycar have launched nationwide after a trial period operating only in London. Easycar allows car owners to make better use of their underutilised vehicles by renting them out to other local drivers. This model can work well particularly in locations where there is not seen to be sufficient density of users to support a back-to-base car club car. A Car Club Strategy for London 1.12 Transport for London s (TfL) 2008 Car Club Strategy has recently expired. As a result of work undertaken by the Roads Task Force and as an outcome of the Car Lite event (held in summer 2014), TfL established a car club coalition which is a partnership of car club operators, TfL and Carplus. The Coalition is currently developing a car club strategy for London to cover the period to The draft strategy (A Car Club Strategy for London: Achieving the growth to unlock mainstream car club use) includes the ambition of expanding car club membership in London to 1 million users by This will be achieved through growth in both traditional back-tobase and flexible/point-to-point car clubs. This target is based on work undertaken by Frost and Sullivan for Zipcar 1 and is currently subject to agreement within the car club coalition The strategy is currently in draft form and was presented to the London Councils TEC meeting in late December. Boroughs can currently provide feedback on the draft version to TfL. The intention is that the Coalition work to finalise the strategy by early March After the strategy has been adopted, quarterly Coalition meetings will be established. 1 Car-sharing in London Vision 2020 (2014), Frost and Sullivan for Zipcar February

11 2 Method Study tasks 2.1 Steer Davies Gleave, supported by Carplus, undertook five activities for this study: 1. Analysis of the existing car clubs in the borough, how Ealing compares with other London boroughs and approaches to car club provision in other WestTrans boroughs. 2. Geodemographic profiling of the borough which aimed to identify parts of the borough that display potential for car clubs to grow, based on a range of indicators including Mosaic profile of the population, population density, public transport provision and car ownership. 3. Interviews with car club operators in London, including those currently operating in Ealing and other car club operators. 4. Interviews with a selection of developers in Ealing. 5. Analysis of data from the Carplus Annual Survey for members based in Ealing. 2.2 This information was used to develop a series of future growth scenarios for the borough, which were discussed in detail and refined at a scenario development workshop with LBE officers and Carplus in December Structure of the report 2.3 Following this introduction, the report is organised in the following chapters: Section three describes the existing car clubs situation in Ealing. Section four contains an assessment of which parts of the borough display potential for car clubs to grow. Section five provides a summary of the interviews undertaken with existing and potential operators. Section six summarises the developer interviews. Section seven outlines the growth future growth scenarios for Ealing. Section eight concludes with recommendations. February

12 3 Car clubs in Ealing: existing situation 3.1 This section describes the car clubs currently in operation in Ealing, recent growth in car club members and provision of cars. It also describes the levels of utilisation of the cars currently operating in the borough. Car club cars in Ealing 3.2 As shown in Figure 3.1, the number of cars available to car club members in Ealing has grown gradually from 2012 to 2014 from a base of 68 cars to 83 cars. Figure 3.1: Car club cars in Ealing - January 2012 to June 2014 (all operators) February

13 Car club members in Ealing 3.3 Figure 3.2 shows that member number have grown more dramatically from 2,600 in January 2012 to 4,800 in June 2014, a growth of over 80%. This is a positive trend: where member numbers are growing more quickly than the number of cars provided, this provides a ratio of members to car, generating efficiencies for car club operators. Figure 3.2: Car club members in Ealing - January 2012 to June 2014 February

14 Car club growth in Ealing compared to Greater London 3.4 Figure 3.3 shows how annual car club member and car growth in Ealing compares with growth in Greater London as a whole. It shows an average annual growth rate for car club members of 28% in Ealing compared to 11% for Greater London as a whole: car club membership is growing more than twice as fast as the London average. 3.5 The annual growth in the number of cars in Ealing from 2012 to 2014 was 10% compared with a decline in numbers of car club cars in Greater London of 3%. It should be noted that this period coincides with consolidation activities by Zipcar following the takeover of Streetcar, which reduced their overall number of vehicles in London. Figure 3.3: Annual car club growth 2012 to 2014: Ealing vs Greater London Locations of car clubs 3.6 City Car Club, Hertz 24/7and Zipcar are the three main car club operators in Ealing. 3.7 Zipcar is the largest car club operator in the Borough with 41 cars. This is followed by City Car Club with 37 cars. Hertz 24/7 operate five cars in the borough. 3.8 Figure 3.4 shows the location of each car club car in Ealing. There are over 50 car club car locations between these three operators, the majority of which are located in the south/south-east of the borough, particularly within the triangle Hanwell, Ealing Broadway and South Ealing, as well as between Acton Central and South Acton. The majority of the car clubs are located within 1km of National Rail or London Underground stations. 3.9 Only two car clubs are within the north west of Ealing Borough and each is over 2.5km away from any other club. February

15 Figure 3.4: Car club locations February

16 Richmond upon Thames Brent Ealing Merton Greenwich Waltham Forest Kingston upon Thames Hounslow Croydon Barking and Dagenham Sutton Barnet Enfield Hillingdon Harrow Redbridge Bromley Bexley Havering Car club bays per 10,000 head of population Ealing Car Club Study Draft Report Existing car club provision: how Ealing compares 3.10 Figure 3.5 shows the number of car club bays per 10,000 head of population in Ealing compared to other Outer London boroughs. It shows that provision in Ealing, at 2.8 car club bays per 10,000 population is almost three times higher than the Outer London average of 1. Only Richmond upon Thames (4.1) and Brent (3.4) have a higher number of bays per 10,000 head of population than Ealing. Figure 3.5: Car club members per head of population: Outer London boroughs Outer London average = Figure 3.6 shows the level of car club bay provision per 10,000 head of population for all London boroughs. The level of provision for Ealing (2.8 bays per 10,000 population) is exactly the same as the overall London average. February

17 Camden Kensington and Chelsea Westminster Islington City of London Lambeth Hackney Tower Hamlets Hammersmith and Fulham Wandsworth Southwark Richmond upon Thames Brent Haringey Ealing Merton Lewisham Greenwich Waltham Forest Kingston upon Thames Hounslow Croydon Newham Barking and Dagenham Sutton Barnet Enfield Hillingdon Harrow Redbridge Bromley Bexley Havering Car Club Bays per 10,000 head of population Ealing Car Club Study Draft Report Figure 3.6: Car club members per head of population: all London boroughs Greater London average = Utilisation analysis 3.12 The latest utilisation information from car club operators in Ealing was obtained from LBE records. For each bay, a utilisation figure showing the proportion of bookable time that the cars in each bay are booked by members. Operators base the utilisation a bookable time period of 24 hours a day Provision of car club cars and utilisation of bays by ward is shown in Table 3.1. There is a correlation between the number of cars provided and the level of utilisation generally car clubs are more utilised where more cars are provided Car clubs in East Acton, Southfield, Walpole and Ealing Broadway are most utilised. Those in Lady Margaret, Cleveland and Hobbayne are least utilised, though the number of cars in each ward is low. Although provision is typically based on demand for car clubs, where car club cars are in isolated locations, the car club can struggle to gain profile and the offer is less attractive to users than wards where there is a cluster of car club locations. February

18 Table 3.1: Car club cars and utilisation by ward Ward Average utilisation Jan-Jun 2014 Number of cars East Acton 33% 6 Southfield 29% 8 Walpole 28% 7 Ealing Broadway 27% 16 Acton Central 26% 9 Ealing Common 26% 6 South Acton 25% 6 Northfield 21% 5 Hanger Hill 20% 3 Elthorne 16% 4 Greenford Broadway 14% 1 Cleveland 12% 1 Hobbayne 12% 3 Lady Margaret 12% 2 Dormers Wells 0 Greenford Green 0 North Greenford 0 Northolt Mandeville 0 Northolt West End 0 Norwood Green 0 Perivale 0 Southall Broadway 0 Southall Green Figure 3.7 shows the levels of car club utilisation by ward. There is a distinct link between car club provision and utilisation levels, with locations to the east of the borough and the greatest number of car club cars seeing the highest utilisation levels. February

19 Figure 3.7: Utilisation of car club bays February

20 % of respondents Ealing Car Club Study Draft Report Impacts of car clubs on Ealing members 3.16 Using data from the Carplus 2012/13 and 2013/14 Annual Surveys, the travel behaviour of 144 car club members in Ealing was analysed. The analysis sought to understand the impact of car clubs on car ownership, car use and frequency of use of other modes of travel. This section contains key results from the survey for Ealing members and shows comparisons with the results for car club members other Outer London boroughs The Carplus Annual Survey is the only comprehensive and independently verified dataset collected on the car club sector in the UK. The Carplus Annual Survey has collected data on car club operations, membership profiles and the impact of car club membership on travel choices and the environment since Steer Davies Gleave has administered and reported the surveys since Impact of car club membership on car ownership 3.18 Respondents were asked to state how many cars their household owned before joining the car club and how many they now own. As shown in Figure 3.8, more than half of Ealing members (54%) owned at least one car before joining the car club and this fell to 24% after joining. In comparison to other Outer London boroughs, car ownership was higher before joining (54% compared to 48% in Outer London) but post-joining ownership levels were similar in Ealing (24%) and Outer London (26%). Figure 3.8: Car ownership before and after joining a car club 100% 90% 80% 3% 9% 8% 22% 5% 20% 3+ cars 70% 44% 37% 2 cars 60% 1 car 50% 0 cars 40% 76% 74% 30% 20% 46% 52% 10% 0% Ealing Outer London Ealing Outer London Before joining car club After joining car club When asked if they would have bought a private car if they had not joined the car club, 37% of Ealing members stated that they would, compared to 32% of Outer London members. Members were asked whether joining the car club had made it more or less likely that their household will buy a car (or another car) in the next few years. The majority of Ealing February

21 members (67%) stated that they would be less likely to buy a car having joined the car club, compared to 61% for Outer London. 20% of Ealing members had sold or otherwise disposed of (and not replaced) a car in the 12 months before joining the car club. This is notably higher than the Outer London average of 11%. Those members who had sold or otherwise disposed of (and not replaced) a car (25 Ealing members in total) were asked to state the extent to which the car club was a factor in the decision. Five stated it was the main reason and nine stated it was a major factor in their decision. Travel behaviour amongst car club members The frequency of use of each travel mode for Ealing members are shown in Figure 3.9 with the same data for members in other Outer London boroughs shown in Figure Key results are: Ealing car club members are regular users of local public transport with 53% using the Underground three or more times a week and 51% using the bus three or more times a week. Frequency of train use is lower at 17% using train three times a week and notably lower than the Outer London average of 35%. Car club members are concentrated in the east of the borough where there are good Underground links and it appears that car club members make more frequent use of these links than of Ealing s rail services. Ealing members make slightly more frequent bicycle trips than members in other Outer London boroughs with 33% of Ealing members travelling by bike at least once a week compared to 27% of Outer London members. Walking trips are made frequently by Ealing members - 80% make a walking trip of over 20 minutes at least once a week, a similar frequency as observed in Outer London (78%). Half of Ealing members stated that they made no trips by car driver in a private car in the last 12 months with only 20% making such trips at least once a week, slightly less than the Outer London figure of 23%. The majority of Ealing members use a car club car at least once a month (51%) compared to 53% of Outer London members. February

22 Figure 3.9: Frequency of use of other modes: Ealing members 3 or more times a week 1-2 times a week At least once a month At least once a year Don't know No trips made Underground Bus Walking Bicycle Train Car driver private car Car passenger Taxi Car driver car club car Coach % 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of respondents Figure 3.10: Frequency of use of other modes: Outer London members 3 or more times a week 1-2 times a week At least once a month At least once a year Don't know No trips made Underground Bus Walking Bicycle Train Car driver private car Car passenger Taxi Car driver car club car Coach % 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% % of respondents 3.19 Figure 3.11 compares the frequency of use of each mode of travel by car club members in Ealing, against the general Greater London population, using data from the London Travel Demand Survey (LTDS). It shows that: February

23 % using mode at least once a week Ealing Car Club Study Draft Report Ealing members use the Underground more frequently than the general population (75% at least once a week compared to 38% of the general population). Bus and train use is also higher than average. Ealing car club members cycle more than three times more frequently than the average Londoner - 33% cycle at least once a week compared to a London average of 12%. Figure 3.2: Frequency of mode use by car club members compared with the general population Ealing members General population (LTDS) Walking* Underground Bus Train Bicycle Car Driver (private vehicle) Taxi *The Carplus Annual Survey asks for walking journeys of 20 minutes or more February

24 4 Understanding potential for car clubs 4.1 To understand locations where there may be potential demand for car clubs across Ealing, the following analysis was undertaken: Car club provision across London and how the level of provision across Ealing compares. Car club growth in Ealing. Population characteristics and public transport accessibility levels of Ealing to identify locations which are likely to generate the highest demand of car club membership and usage. 4.2 The data reviewed and its relevance to assessing demand for car clubs are shown in Table 3.1 Table 4.1: Data sources reviewed and relevance to car club demand Data Public Transport Accessibility Levels (PTALs) Mosaic 2 profile Population density Controlled Parking Zones (CPZs) Car ownership Travel to work by car Relevance to assessing car club demand A good level of public transport accessibility is required to enable car club members to make most of their journeys by public transport. Car club membership is more prevalent amongst certain socio-demographic groups. Presence of these groups in an area would indicate greater potential for a car club Car clubs work when there is a high number of users within short walking distance of a car club car. High population densities increase the likelihood of this. Inability to park a private vehicle easily can be a stimulant to joining car clubs. Presence of a CPZ indicates pressure for parking. Traditionally, car club members do not own a private car (80% of London members do not own a car) so low car ownership may indicate potential for car clubs. Potential for car clubs may also exist in areas where multiple car ownership is high (where car club membership could replace ownership of a second car for example) Car club membership is most viable for people who are not reliant on a car for travel to work. Areas where a lower proportion of people travel to work by car show greater potential for a car club. 2 Mosaic is a geodemographic segmentation tool that profiles the population based on latest consumer, demographic, behavioural and societal trends. February

25 Assessing potential for further growth Public transport accessibility 4.3 Figure 4.1 shows the Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of Ealing as of The figure shows a high level of public transport accessibility around Ealing Broadway station which has a PTAL Level of 6b, and the surrounding are having a PTAL Level of 6a. Such high PTAL scores are more typical of inner London boroughs. PTAL scores are also high in much of the east and south east of the borough where PTAL Levels of 5 (Very Good) are typical, especially around National Rail and London Underground Stations. 4.5 Throughout Ealing typically a PTAL Level of 3 (Moderate) runs along the major roads that connect more densely populated areas and centres. Much of the remaining area, approximately two thirds of Ealing, has a PTAL Level of 2 (poor) or less. 4.6 The west of Ealing has large areas of low PTAL ratings between (1a 2) small areas of PTAL Level 4/5 around the centres of Southall, Greenford and Northolt. 4.7 As expected, the car club cars are currently located in the eastern areas of the borough where public transport accessibility is highest. February

26 Figure 4.1: PTAL of Ealing February

27 Mosaic 4.8 Figure 4.2 shows the Mosaic Groups present in Ealing, and table 3.2 contains a description of the two most prevalent Groups: City Prosperity and Urban Cohesion, which make up 73% of the population of the borough. Figure 4.2: Mosaic Groups in Ealing Table 4.2: Description of City Prosperity and Urban Cohesion groups City Prosperity Work in high status positions: City s key financial and professional organisations. High status roles in politics, media and the arts. Substantial salaries. Able to afford expensive urban homes: Around half of these properties are owned, with many rented. Homes chosen for easy commutes. Well-educated, confident and ambitious. Many are single and less likely than others to have children. Car ownership is relatively low. Constantly connected via their smartphones. Spend many hours online. Read broadsheet newspapers. Urban Cohesion Work in lower managerial, intermediate and semi-routine occupations. Household incomes are moderate. Settled extended families and older people in multi-cultural city suburbs. Majority are homeowners, many without the need for a mortgage. Settled in these neighbourhoods for many years, enjoying the sense of community they feel there. Group Includes: Families with school age and older children. Older people pre and post retirement. Larger families who share their home with elderly parents or other family members. Significant proportion are of South Asian origin. Many are technology fans and they like to have up-to-date gadgets and phones which they use extensively. February

28 Propensity to join a Car Club Ealing Car Club Study Draft Report City Prosperity Includes sub-groups: Uptown Elite (56% of City Prosperity group) High status households owning elegant homes in accessible inner suburbs where they enjoy city life in comfort. Metro High-Flyers (27%) Ambitious 20 and 30-somethings renting expensive apartments in highly commutable areas of major cities. World-Class Wealth (16%) Global high flyers and families of privilege living luxurious lifestyles in London s most exclusive boroughs. Urban Cohesion Includes sub-groups: Cultural Comfort (51% of Urban Cohesion): Thriving families with good incomes in multicultural urban communities. Community Elders (45%): Established older households owning city homes in diverse neighbourhoods Ageing Access (3%): Older residents owning small inner suburban properties with good access to amenities. 4.9 Figure 4.3 shows the propensity to join a car club for each Mosaic group. Based on current car club provision in London (i.e. Zipcar/City Car Club/ etc.) the City Prosperity Group has a high propensity to become a car club member, while the Urban Cohesion Group has a low propensity to become a car club member It should be noted that this propensity is based on existing car club membership operators have targeted the areas where there are high proportions of these groups. Areas where there is a high proportion of the other Mosaic groups, such as Urban Cohesion, have not been targeted by car club operators. This does not mean that there is no potential in these areas, more that they do not represent the traditional member base for car clubs and may require an alternative marketing and development approach to build car club membership in those areas. Figure 4.3: Propensity to become car club member by Mosaic group Average propensity = City Prosperity Domestic Success Municipal Challenge Rental Hubs Urban Cohesion Other 4.11 Figure 4.3 shows the locations of Mosaic groups in the borough. The south and east of Ealing, currently the key market for car clubs, is dominated by City Prosperity (well paid, February

29 young/middle aged) with smaller numbers of Prestige Positions (well paid, senior), Municipal Challenge (low earning, renting), Rental Hubs (young professionals, renting) The west of Ealing is dominated by Urban Cohesion (home owners, extended family). Within this are small concentrations of Municipal Challenge, Rental Hubs and Domestic Success (well paid, family) % of people within the group City Prosperity do not own a vehicle. This is the dominant group within the south east of Ealing, which is the area where the majority of car clubs are based. February

30 Figure 4.4: Mosaic Groups within Ealing February

31 Population density 4.14 Figure 4.5 shows the population density of Ealing at present while Figure 4.6 shows the expected population density in Both maps also show the locations of allocated development sites of more than two hectares, marked as yellow stars The figure shows that currently the south and south east of Ealing is currently more densely populated than the north. Much of the north west of Ealing is expected to see little change in population between now and This is also the same for the east The west and south west of Ealing, particularly the areas around Southall, are expected to see an increase in population density by The projected population growth is closely linked to allocated development sites, particularly those around Southall where, according to the Southall Opportunity Area Planning Framework, there is enough under-used land to create more than 6,000 new homes and 3,000 new jobs over the next twenty years In addition, the development of Crossrail (planned to open in Southall by 2019) will significantly increase the accessibility of that part of Ealing. Crossrail s fast links to various Central London stations and direct links to employment sites in East London and Canary Wharf may attract more of the City Prosperity Mosaic group to live close to its stations at Southall and Hanwell where there is currently less car club provision The area surrounding Ealing Broadway towards the centre of Ealing will also see an increase in population density By 2031 almost half of Ealing will have a population density of between 175 to 420 people per km 2 compared to a third at present. February

32 Figure 4.5: Population density of Ealing (2014) and development site allocations of over two hectares February

33 Figure 4.6: Projected population density of Ealing (2031) and development site allocations of over two hectares February

34 Travel to work by car 4.20 Figure 4.7 shows the proportion of Ealing residents who travel to work by car by Census Output Area. It follows the pattern of other maps with eastern areas displaying a low proportion of residents travelling to work by car with higher proportions found to the north west. Compared to other areas of western Ealing, levels of car commuting around Southall are a relatively low. Controlled parking zones 4.21 Figure 4.8 shows the Controlled Parking Zones (CPZ) within Ealing as well areas where a consultation is planned for on existing or future CPZs. The figure shows that the much of the east of Ealing is covered by a CPZ, whilst almost all of the west of Ealing has no CPZ, nor a planned consultation for a future CPZ. Again, the area around Southall stands out as a location where there is high pressure on residential parking that requires a CPZ but no car club provision to facilitate living without owning a car. February

35 Figure 4.7: Travel to work by car February

36 Figure 4.8: Controlled Parking Zones in Ealing February

37 Car ownership 4.22 Figure 4.9 shows the proportion of households that do not own at least one car by Census Output Area. The figure shows that within most areas of the east of Ealing, between 50%-80% of Ealing do not have access to a private car As shown in previous figures, this area is dominated by residential groups with high incomes and low car ownership (City Prosperity). Much of the area lies within a CPZ, and there is a high concentration of Car Clubs. Much of the south west of Ealing, including the area around Southall, has similarly low car ownership as the east. However, the area is made up of a different dominant Mosaic Group (Urban Cohesion). Much of the area around Southall lies within a CPZ and there are no existing car clubs. This area is also expected to see an increase in population density between 2014 and The north west of Ealing, where there is only one car club car, has areas of higher private car access. Some areas close to Greenford National Rail Station and Northolt Underground Station have private car ownership as high as % Figure 4.10 shows multiple car ownership by ward. There may be opportunities for car clubs to attract people who currently own more than one car, who could use car club cars in preferences to a second or third household car. This type of car club use currently represents a low proportion of overall car club membership (the majority of London members - 80% - do not own any car) but could represent a market for car clubs to exploit. February

38 Figure 4.9: Percentage of households with no car access by ward February

39 Figure 4.10: Percentage of households owning two or more cars By ward February

40 Car clubs in WestTrans boroughs 4.26 As discussed in section seven, expansion of car clubs in Ealing may require greater cooperation with other London boroughs, in particular to facilitate one-way cross-borough car club journeys, should this model be applied in West London. As such, the approach to car clubs in each WestTrans borough is of relevance to any future development of car clubs in Ealing The existing car club provision, permit fees and relevant car club policies and incentives in other WestTrans boroughs are shown in Table 4.3. The table also indicates the cost of business parking permits and whether the business parking permits allow borough-wide parking, or are restricted to parking within a specified zone Three boroughs (Brent, Hammersmith & Fulham and Hounslow) offer a discount on residential parking permits for low emission vehicles. Two of the four boroughs that responded offer discounted fees for car club bays with Brent offering bays free of charge with no expiry date. In Hounslow, the discount is provided using LIP funds. Car club operators are charged between up to 791 for on-street bays None of the boroughs currently operates a borough-wide business parking permit scheme whereby permit holders can park in any CPZ in the borough. In Hounslow and Brent, some Council staff have access to permits which allow them to park in CPZs across the borough. February

41 Table 4.3: Car clubs in WestTrans boroughs Borough Number of onstreet car club bays* Number of offstreet car club bays* Car club bay permit fees** Business parking permit fees** Boroughwide business parking permits** Low emission discount for resident permit Brent No Yes, sliding scale by emission band Ealing No No Hammersmith & Fulham No Harrow 0 3 N/A N/A N/A No Hillingdon 1 5 N/A no on-street bays Jan No Hounslow No Yes, half price permit for Euro 5 compliant and emitting less than 100g/km of co2 A 50% discount is offered for the first vehicle where they meet the government road tax band A and B for low emissions Relevant policies and incentives Contributions to car clubs and pool car schemes in place of private parking in new developments across the borough secured through a planning obligation. Encourage car clubs through the planning process particularly at residential developments through travel plans Payment of a new car club will be sought through the council s planning obligations where the qualifying thresholds are met. The payment will cover the cost of a new vehicle(s) and the cost of amending (if necessary) the existing or the provision of providing a new traffic order to provide a car club bay. The developer should first investigate providing the car club bay on site; onstreet should be considered as the last resort. Encourage car clubs through the planning process particularly at residential developments through travel plans. LIP commitment to reduce car dependency and multiple car household, including through providing parking provision for car club bays 'Car Lite' Programme Development & Implementation A range of measures to encourage efficient car use including: Expansion of car club provision. Deliver a net increase in car club provision from 2013 base. Run one car sharing promotion campaign each year * May 2014 ** January 2015 ***3 month period at a cost of 120 per period February

42 5 The views of operators Introduction 5.1 To better understand current operations and potential future operations we undertook a series of structured interviews with each of the existing car club operators and a range of potential future car club operators. Interviews were primarily undertaken face-to-face, or by telephone if this was not possible in the timescale. 5.2 Structured interviews were undertaken with the following current and potential car club operators: Current operators Zipcar, City Car Club, Hertz 24/7 3. Potential operators E-Car, Co-wheels, icar, DriveNow, Bollere and Car2Go. 5.3 We also spoke with WestTrans for a wider west London overview and have referred to the Draft Car Club Strategy for London for a London overview. Content of structured interviews 5.4 The structured interviews included discussing the following topics (a full list of questions is included in Appendix A): Current operations. Car club policies. Future operations. 5.5 To provide the opportunity for operators to provide an open account of their views discussions are reported here without identifying operator names. Current operations 5.6 Currently car club operations are focussed in the south and east of the borough. Over recent years car club membership in the borough has seen good levels of growth (as seen in chapter 2). 5.7 Car clubs are present to some extent in the adjacent boroughs of: Brent (coverage from Zipcar and City Car Club); Hammersmith and Fulham (coverage from Zipcar and City Car Club); Hounslow (Zipcar and City Car Club in the east of the borough); Hillingdon (very limited coverage by Hertz 24/7 and Zipcar); and Harrow (very limited coverage by City Car Club). 3 It was not possible to engage with Hertz 24/7 as part of this work. February

43 5.8 Operating in adjacent boroughs can provide some economies of scale to the operators in terms of servicing vehicles and operations. 5.9 The opportunity to grow car club operations more widely across the borough was discussed with existing operators. It was generally perceived that demand for car clubs in the borough is strongest in the locations where car clubs are currently located, with lower perceived demand to the west and north west of the borough In terms of encouraging expansion from existing operators to the west and north west of the borough lower permit prices were mentioned as a potential incentive Marketing was discussed with existing operators. Marketing to the public is through a combination of digital marketing and partnership marketing, for example with Time Out magazine. Some operators include on-street information at car club bays to describe the benefits of car clubs and how car clubs work. Much of the marketing is undertaken on a London-wide basis, rather than borough-specific marketing In terms of marketing to businesses, operators undertake targeting a business sectors which they expect to be most receptive to car clubs. In addition, as could be expected, where businesses show interest the operators will respond to specific enquires Car clubs are also provided for and used by LBE, with car club cars available at council office locations. Car club policies 5.14 Currently multiple operators offer car club cars on-street in Ealing. Both current and potential future car club operators concur that allowing multiple operators to provide cars on street in Ealing is preferable to a single on-street operator, offering more choice to residents and keeping the market competitive. Some operators noted that having too many operators in a particular borough could result in too many options for customers to choose from The Draft Car Club Strategy for London concurs with this view, noting with regard to single operator boroughs: as schemes mature and grow and awareness increases, facilitating competition can consolidate networks across London and expand the options for customers and developers looking to install car club vehicles in new developments Most operators mentioned that car club permits were expensive in the borough suggesting current fees are prohibiting further growth in car club numbers It was suggested that lower permit prices for bays, particularly in the outer (western) parts of the borough, or locations with more deprivation, is a method to encourage car club provision borough-wide. One operator suggested that permit pricing should be linked to TfL Underground zones, with Zone 6 permits the least expensive and Zone 1 permits the most expensive. In Ealing this would have the effect of the cheapest permit prices in Northolt (Zone 5) becoming more expensive in Ealing Broadway and Acton (Zone 3) The Draft Car Club Strategy for London notes the following regarding parking bay fees: permit charges, which vary by borough, can slow down expansion. For reference, the Table 4.3, in the previous chapter details car club permit prices for the surrounding WestTrans Boroughs, showing a wide range of fees and policies relating to car clubs. February

44 Future operations 5.19 All current and potential operators showed interest in operating in Ealing, with some existing operators keen to expand their operations. Back-to-base operators operating in the borough would not necessarily require the operator to also be operating in adjacent boroughs. For one-way and point-to-point operators, operating in Ealing without adjacent boroughs would be more difficult, as users do not typically drive entirely within one borough The majority of operators noted interest in expanding operations in a range of other London boroughs, both in Inner London and Outer London. Growing the business to business market was also noted as important by a number of operators There was a mix of views from operators regarding potential new models of operation (e.g. one-way and point-to point). On balance is was felt that the back-to-base model is complementary to these new models, rather than a direct competitor, i.e. multiple models could work alongside one another in the same borough Operators generally felt that identification of new bays should be undertaken jointly with operators and LBE Operators were asked for their views on the target figure of 1,000,000 car club members in London by 2020, as detailed in the draft Car Club Strategy for London. While some operators questioned the analysis behind this target there was general agreement that there is significant potential for growing the car club market across London and that having a target to aim for was helpful for the industry. It was also noted by some operators that a mix of vehicles including EVs are required for this growth to be achieved. February

45 6 The views of developers Method 6.1 The study team sought to engage with developers in Ealing to better understand how offstreet car clubs could be incorporated into new developments. A list of potential interviewees and contact details was provided by LBE. 6.2 The interviews covered the following topics: Support for the provision of car clubs in new development. Preference for car club to be for the sole use of residents or shared with neighbouring residents. Preference for car club bays to be provided on- or off-street. Preference for single-operator or multi-operator car clubs within boroughs. 6.3 Engaging developers in the process proved to be difficult. Six organisations were contacted by phone and . Three organisations responded and gave feedback via a combination of telephone interviews and responses. 6.4 The interviews were conducted during November and December Support for the provision of car clubs in new development 6.5 The survey gauged the level of support from developers and their agents for providing a car club within new developments. Two respondents who stated a preference indicated strong support for the provision of car clubs in the development. The main reasons cited for this support are: The car club will lessen the impact of the development on the surrounding highway network and lessen the likelihood of cars from the development over-spilling onto the surrounding highway network. The car club will improve access for residents, occupants and visitors of the development. It encourages people to be eco-friendly, as people only have to drive when necessaryencourages walking and a healthy lifestyle. Clients that use the car club do not negatively impact on the occupants of the building. 6.6 Developers also commented that the car club is a selling point for the development and, in one instance, suggested that it had reduced the area of land needed for car parking. February

46 Preference for car club to be for the sole use of residents or shared with neighbouring residents. 6.7 Respondents were asked what they see as the advantages and disadvantages of making car clubs available only to occupants of the development or making it shared with residents from surrounding neighbourhoods. 6.8 The respondents felt that sole use by occupants is likely to work best with large developments and the main advantage is that car club vehicles are more likely to be available for the residents / occupants of the development. The developer wants to ensure that the facilities being provided by the development are of direct benefit to its occupants. Whereas the main advantage of making the car club available to the wider population is that widening the market for the vehicles, makes them more commercially viable and it benefits more people. 6.9 When asked to state a general preference, respondents stated it was difficult to make generalisations, as each location is different. For smaller developments it was felt that sharing with the wider community might be more important to ensure viability, whereas in larger developments and/or ones that are mixed use, then it is better to have both (i.e. some vehicles for sole use of occupants and some shared use). On balance there was a preference for making car clubs available to the wider population. Preference for car club bays to be provided on-street or off-street With reference to the specific sites that respondents were dealing with, they stated that the main advantage of on-street is that the car club vehicles will be accessible to more people and more visible. This was felt to be especially important in mixed use sites, where employees and visitors need to have access to the vehicles, as well as residents The main issue with providing off-street bays was to do with access by non-occupants. The main advantage of providing off-street bays is security if the bays are located within a secure car park, making the car park accessible to non-residents / non-occupants diminishes the security of the car park. However the car club vehicles can be more difficult to access for instance if located in a basement car park where there is a form of access control, also there could be security issues Again, respondents did not have a general preference for one arrangement or the other, with all respondents noting that each location is different and should be assessed on its own merit. Preferences for single-operator or multi-operator car clubs within Boroughs? 6.13 Respondents were asked to state whether they prefer car clubs to be provided by a single operator within a borough, or whether a multi-operator was preferable. The respondents gave mixed views. One suggested that a multi-operator system is better as competition breeds efficiency and drives costs down - more car clubs = more choice and lower prices for all and encourages entrepreneurial businesses such as these to flourish. The opposing view was that a single-operator system has advantages as, with a single operator, it is likely to be easier to agree, co-ordinate and operate a car club. Summary 6.14 In summary, there was strong support for the provision of car clubs in new developments and a sense that the most appropriate way to provide this depends on the nature of the site, as each site is different. Each case should be assessed on its merit. February

47 7 Future options for car clubs in Ealing Future scenarios workshop 7.1 To help inform decisions about development of car clubs across the borough we held a workshop with borough officers in December This workshop included the following agenda, much of this is presented earlier in this report: Car clubs in Ealing: current situation; New developments in car clubs; Progress of the study: Operator engagement; Analysis of the Ealing car club market; Developer engagement; and Scenario development. Scenario development 7.2 As part of the workshop we assessed, with borough officers, the following potential future car club scenarios: Scenario 1: Current situation, grow back-to-base with existing operators 7.3 Scenario 1 is the based on the current situation. Growth in car club provision and membership across the borough would be encouraged through the existing three back-to-base operators, City Car Club, Hertz 24/7 and Zipcar. Scenario 2: Grow existing back-to-base, adding new operators 7.4 Scenario 2 provides the opportunity for new back-to-base operators to provide car club cars across the borough, in addition to the three existing operators. Scenario 3: Scenario 1 or 2, plus one-way service 7.5 Scenario 3 is based on the back-to-base Scenario 1 or Scenario 2 with the addition of a oneway operator providing one-way car club vehicles within the borough. Scenario 4: Scenario 1 or 2, plus point-to-point service 7.6 Scenario 4 is based on the back-to-base Scenario 1 or Scenario 2 with the addition of a pointto-point operator providing point-to-point car club vehicles within the borough. February

48 7.7 We asked borough officers to identify the objectives for car clubs within the borough. As part of the workshop each scenario was then scored to assess how they addressed each of the objectives, based on a red (does not address objectives), amber (partially addresses objectives) and green (addresses objectives) scoring system. Table 7.1 shows this assessment. 7.8 It should be noted that this assessment is an informed judgement, based on information available at the time of the workshop, on the relative benefits of Scenario 1 (the status quo) compared to the other three scenarios. New evidence, or future changes to operators or operations may affect these assessments. Table 7.1: Assessment of Scenarios by Borough Objectives Borough Objective Scenario 1 Increase sustainable transport options Increase accessibility of car clubs (e.g. 100% population within 5 minute walk) Relieve parking pressure Reduce road congestion Improve local air quality Current situation - grow back-to-base with existing operators Scenario 2 Grow back-to-base adding new operators Scenario 3 Scenario 1 or 2 plus one-way service Scenario 4 Scenario 1 or 2 plus point-to-point service Amber Dark Green Dark Green 4 Dark Green 4 Red Dark Green Dark Green Dark Green Amber Light Green Light Green 5 Light Green 5 Amber Dark Green Light Green 4 Light Green 4 Amber Light Green 6 Amber 7 Dark Green 8 Analysis of Scenarios 7.9 On the basis of the assessment of scenarios at the workshop with borough officers, Scenario 2, Scenario 3 and Scenario 4 scored more highly than the Scenario 1, the existing situation For Scenario 3 or Scenario 4 it was noted that agreement for a scheme operating in adjacent boroughs would be required, in order for a one-way or point-to-point operations to function properly. This view was informed by discussions with potential one-way and point-to-point operators. This discussion with other boroughs is not within the scope of this study, but forms part of our recommendations detailed in the following chapter We have therefore focused on the potential benefits to the borough of Scenario 2, compared to the current situation of Scenario 1. 4 Evidence required 5 Short term increase in parking pressure expected 6 Assumes some EVs 7 Assumes no EVs 8 Assumes all EVs February

49 7.12 Figure 7.1 and Figure 7.2, which follow, show a projection of potential car club cars and car club members in LBE, based on Scenario 1 and Scenario 2, from present to The projections are based on the following assumptions: Scenario 1 (current situation) assumptions Number of back-to-base car club cars continue to grow at current observed rates (2012 to ) with new cars provided on street through intensification in existing locations by existing operators; Car club member growth is constrained by car club provision, with car club members per car limited to 60 (assumption that with more than 60 members per car service levels and car availability are both diminished); and LBE s support for encouraging car clubs remains unchanged. Scenario 2 (grow back-to-base adding new operators) assumptions Car club member growth continues as current observed rates (2012 to ), not constrained by car club provision; Number of back-to-base car club cars grows at faster rate than current observed rates (2012 to 2014), with new cars provided more widely across the borough by existing and new operators in response to member demand; and LBE provides additional support to encourage car clubs, including discounted permit fees for bays in the west of the borough The projections show that, based on the assumptions used, growth in car club cars and members would be greater in Scenario 2 (Grow back-to-base adding new operators) than Scenario 1 (current situation). 9 Annual car club car growth in LBE was 10.5% in Annual car club member in LBE was 28.0% in February

50 Figure 7.1: Projected potential car club car growth by scenario Figure 7.2: Projected potential car club member growth by scenario 7.14 Table 7.2 shows projected car club car and member numbers in 2020, based on these two scenarios. For reference Greater London car club member projections (as yet unadopted) from the draft Car Club Strategy for London are also included. It should be noted that these projections are not directly comparable, as the Greater London projections include Inner London (where higher car club take up is expected) and include one-way and point-to-point February

51 members, while the Ealing numbers do not, for reasons noted in paragraph The Greater London figures are included to highlight the scale of growth in member numbers projected across the capital and demonstrate that the projected member numbers in this report for Ealing are a relatively conservative estimate. Table 7.2: Projected car club cars and members by scenario Number of Car Club Cars Scenario Growth (%) London Borough of Ealing Scenario 1 (current situation) London Borough of Ealing Scenario 2 (grow back-to-base with new operators) Number of Car Club Members % % Scenario Growth (%) London Borough of Ealing Scenario 1 (current situation) London Borough of Ealing Scenario 2 (grow back-to-base with new operators) Greater London Car Club Strategy (as yet unadopted) 4,350 9, % 4,350 19, % 137,000 1,000, % February

52 8 Recommendations Introduction 8.1 Our recommendations presented here are based on the analysis undertaken in this report, the discussions at the future scenarios workshop with officers in December 2014 and the draft TfL Car Club Strategy dated 11 th December The car club market in London is dynamic and subject to considerable change over time. These recommendations are based on information currently available and are valid at the time of reporting (January 2015). We recommend LBE should keep these recommendations under review, keep up to date with developments and create relationships with new providers. Recommendations 8.3 The car club market in Ealing has seen strong growth both in member numbers and car club provision over recent years. Member numbers grew by 28% per year from 2012 to 2014, while car club cars provided in the borough grew by 10.5% per year, over the same period. 8.4 Currently car club provision is predominantly in the east and south of the borough. LBE would like to increase the coverage of car clubs across the borough, currently there are significant parts of the borough without car club provision, including North Acton, Hanger Lane, Perivale, Greenford, Northolt and Southall. 8.5 We conclude that the following actions would help to facilitate greater borough-wide car club coverage: Recommendation 1 Growing back-to-base car clubs 1a Offer differential pricing for permits across the borough 8.6 We recommend differential pricing for car club permits across the borough to incentivise car club operators to introduce vehicles in a wider range of locations, particularly to the west and north of the borough. This could be through a time limited discounted permit, or differential pricing for permits, e.g. based on Underground Zones. LBE should liaise with other WestTrans boroughs on permit pricing, to discuss potential for a consistent offer to car club operators across West London. 8.7 Table 8.1 shows estimated cost projections for offering discounted bay fees to operators for all new bays in the borough. These calculations illustrate the potential size of a required investment fund to encourage borough-wide car club provision, in practice it is likely that not all bays would be offered at a discounted rate. The projections assume the following: 68 additional bays for scenario additional bays for scenario 2. February

53 All additional bays are on-street. 50% or 100% discount applies to the annual 600 fee charged to operators for using new car club bays. Discount applies to all new bays in all parts of the borough. An investment fund is required to make up the difference between providing bays at the full rate ( 600) and a discounted rate. Table 8.1: Projected Investment Fund Required for Discounted Bay Fees Number additional bays Discount Fee per bay Total annual investment fund required Scenario 1: 151 cars by % ,400 Scenario 1: 151 cars by % 0 40,800 Scenario 2: 319 cars by % ,800 Scenario 2: 319 cars by % 0 141,600 1b Allow a wider range of car club operator to operate on street 8.8 We recommend encouraging a wider range of back-to-base car club operators to operate using on-street bays across the borough. This would include car club operators already working in the borough and in addition other back-to-base operators. This recommendation is designed to provide greater borough-wide car club coverage and over time, a greater provision of car club vehicles for local residents. 1c Package new bays in established car club locations with new locations 8.9 There are areas of the borough with no car club provision which have been identified in this study as having potential for car clubs. Areas around Southall which exhibit some characteristics of good car club market potential, including high population density, parking pressure and also areas where new residential developments and Crossrail may change the population profile of the area At present the population profile of such areas does not include groups who tend to join car clubs, which may have previously deterred car clubs from operating in those areas. A suggested way to encourage operators to operate in such areas is offering operators packages of car club bays which would include bays both within the core car club market in eastern Ealing and the new potential markets in the west. Operators in eastern Ealing would then be committed to also operating in the west, helping to build provision in those areas. 1d Work with agencies in western Ealing to develop a new car club market 8.11 Achieving car club growth in western Ealing is likely to an alternative marketing and development approach. LBE should liaise with car club operators, community groups, social housing providers and local businesses to develop a car club offer that appeals to the Urban Cohesion groups present in western Ealing. Recommendation 2 Explore joint approach to one-way and point-to-point across WestTrans boroughs 8.12 For one-way or point-to-point operations to be feasible in Ealing, there is a need for any scheme to be introduced across a number of contiguous boroughs. We recommend exploring with boroughs which surround Ealing a joint approach to facilitate one-way or point-to-point February

54 operations across a group of west London boroughs. We recommend that this is co-ordinated by WestTrans, given the organisation s role to provide support on transport issues to a wide range of key West London stakeholders While we recognise that the benefits or dis-benefits of one-way car clubs or point-to-point car clubs are not fully known in the London setting, given the evolving nature of this market it is important for boroughs to work together and agree a joint view (whether this is to push ahead with such a scheme at the earliest opportunity, adopt a way and see approach, or something in-between). This joint view will facilitate interactions with potential operators, should the boroughs agree to pursue a particular scheme or schemes We also note that while monitoring and evaluation of the effect of trials such as DriveNow on member travel behaviour in London are important, however these services are new and any initial effects on travel behaviour may not represent those which a mature scheme realise in time. Recommendation 3 Quantify the potential benefits of growth in car clubs 8.15 To encourage political buy-in to expanding car clubs more widely across the borough we recommend quantifying the benefits of increasing car club provision, in terms of: Numbers of cars removed from the road; Reduction in car travel; Increase in travel by more sustainable modes; and Reductions in vehicle emissions. Recommendation 4 Incorporate TfL Car Club Strategy recommendations into working practices 8.16 The draft TfL Car Club Strategy includes action for the Car Club Coalition to take forward in order to build car club provision across London. The key actions which Ealing may contribute to are: Action 2 Lobbying key stakeholders to support car clubs: LBE officers should liaise with local businesses and Council members to build support for car clubs in Ealing. This report provides Ealing-specific evidence of the impact of car clubs on car use and ownership which can be disseminated to key stakeholders to help with this. Action 5 Helping Londoners make the switch from private cars: LBE should explore the suggested options of: Incentives linked to public transport use; Graduated parking permit charges for multiple vehicles in a household; Scrappage schemes; Resident parking permit surrender incentives (e.g. free/discounted car club membership, free mileage). Action 6 Making parking management smarter and easier: LBE should work with WestTrans partners to develop common parking standards and contribute to any London Councils working group set up to deliver more consistency on parking permit policy across London. Action 7 Driving the uptake of low emission vehicles: LBE should work with car club operators to identify suitable locations for EV charging points and opportunities for incentivising the introduction of EVs. February

55 Action 8 Improving the profile of car clubs in London: Ealing should work with car club operators to identify suitable at-bay signage and promotion. Action 9 Driving the uptake of car clubs in London s commercial fleets: Ealing should work with local business organisations and car club operators to promote car clubs for business travel. February

56

57 Appendices February

58 Car club operator questionnaire Current operations A.1 Confirmation of current operations in the borough and any Ealing-specific issues or opportunities (if applicable, London otherwise) A.2 Current operations in adjacent boroughs (if applicable) A.3 Current membership levels and trends in the borough (if applicable, London otherwise) A.4 Current marketing activities with the public in the borough (if applicable, London otherwise) A.5 Current marketing activities with businesses in the borough (if applicable, London otherwise) Discussion of car club policies A.6 Multiple operator boroughs - benefits/drawbacks (including new models, floating/point to point) A.7 Single operator boroughs - benefits/drawbacks (including new models, floating/point to point) A.8 Pricing levels for permits, comparing Ealing to other locations A.9 Ways to incentivise development of car clubs borough-wide Future operations A.10 Interest in tendering for car club operations in the borough A.11 Plans for expansion in Ealing/other London Borough A.12 Views on new operating models and preference for single or multi-operator approaches generally and for Ealing A.13 Operator led or LA led car club location identification or a mixture of the two A.14 Ways to improve business engagement A.15 Views on future projections 1,000,000 members by 2020 from draft Car Club Strategy for London February

59 Control Sheet Document Title Ealing Car Club Study Document Type Draft Report Client Contract/Project No. JB SDG Project/Proposal No. Issue history Issue No. Date Details January st draft to client Review Originator Ian Bewick Other Contributors Reviewed by Matthew Clark Distribution Client John Bowman, Francis Torto Steer Davies Gleave Ian Bewick, Matthew Clark L:\Projects\227\2\88\01\Work\05 Reporting\Ealing Car Club Study Report v0.5.docx Control Sheet