- Email: [email protected]
Concepts for Tenant Tickets for Connecting Habitation and Transport
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
International Scientific Conference on Mobility and Transport Transforming Urban Mobility, mobil.TUM 2016, 6-7 June 2016, Munich, Germany
Concepts for tenant tickets for connecting habitation and transport Prof. Dr. Carsten Sommer , Franz Lambrecht * University of Kassel, Chair of Transportation Planning and Traffic Systems, Mönchebergstraße 7, 34125 Kassel,Germany
Abstract About 85% of the daily trips start or end at the own home (MID 2008). The decision to go by foot, bicycle, public transport or car is reached at the residence and depends on the residential environment and housing situation. There are thoughts about alternative financing models to make the public transport more popular on this decision. This can be considered in traffic management for housing areas like student tickets and job tickets. Mobility management for housing areas is understood as method that are developed for residents of specific living quarters or tenants of designated housing companies. They include a specific benefit for the target group in addition to the common services (Bäumer & Köllinger 2009), resulting in a win-win-situation for all participants: the customers get a cheaper access to the public transport and further transport services as well as more options with the choice of transport mode. The transportation company enhances his service, acquires new customers and can plan with solid collection of fees. A more liveable environment through the reduction of the car traffic and parking spaces can be created in the commune. The landlords and housing companies enhance their main product “home”, can reach a better customer loyalty and recovery as well as save costs with parking facilities in development areas. (Bäumer, Reutter & Reudenbach 2008; Dittrich-Wesbuer & Reutter 2003; et.al.) Despite many good arguments, corresponding proposals are only rarely considered in mobility strategies. Because of this a tenant ticket will be developed in the research project DieMo RheinMain. The project is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). Tenant tickets are fare reduced season tickets for public transport for residents of designated housing areas or renter of designated housing companies. The tenant ticket implements the public transport consistently into the proposal of housing companies based on integrated fares and sales channel and provides an access to the public transport with the rent payment. Within the project usable concepts and transferable recommendations for tenant tickets will be developed. Those consider also possible problems with implementation with the aim of reaching an easier and stronger connection between habitation and transport as well as providing the residents bigger possibilities in the choice of
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-561-804-3279; fax: +49-561-804-7382. E-mail address: [email protected]
2352-1465 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of mobil.TUM 2016. doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2016.12.066
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
transport mode. Beside a reduction potential at the transport performance of vehicles and the environmental pollution shall also facilitated the economisation of parking space. Different concepts for tenant tickets (voluntary models and solidary models) will be developed to consider special needs of the customers and different local conditions. Previous activities in mobility management for housing areas will be investigated and parallels will be searched for general mobility management concepts to find solutions. There will be included previous activities and tried concepts of the past as well. At a first workshop with tenant associations, housing companies, municipalities and transport companies all stakeholders come together and discuss in separate groups and the plenum about requirements and expectations of transport services connected with habitation as well as barriers and possible arrangements of services. Different concepts of tenant tickets will be developed from the results of the workshop and the previous investigations. They will be presented to the stakeholders at a second workshop and validated to their practicability. There were already some implemented concepts for tenant tickets but many of them have already been closed. Especially juridical obstacles complicate or obstruct the implementation of traffic concepts. Furthermore the success has often been blocked by insufficient participation and cooperation of the stakeholders as well as missing acceptance. The most realised services, especially at the housing stock, are based on the concept of voluntariness. There is a successful examples in Bielefeld/Germany (moBiel & BGW 2015). The tenants of the “Bielefelder Gemeinnützige Wohnungsbaugesellschaft” can buy a tenant ticket since 2005 which is available for all price levels and is granted with a 10% discount. A similar tenant ticket is offered by the “VBW Bauen und Wohnen” for their tenants at Bochum/Germany, who can buy a season ticket with an 11.5% discount (Bäumer 2003; VBW 2015). The already implemented examples indicate that an intensive cooperation between the stakeholders with settling the financing and distribution, inclusion of tenants and an intensive marketing is particularly necessary for the success. A good service of the public transport, fully accessibility to the services and an easy purchase option is essential as well. Implemented activities need time for an acceptance of the residents. At the workshop with the stakeholders all participants agreed that connections with further services (such as car sharing) over a common access achieve the highest benefit for the tenants. In addition the politics will be held accountable to improve the conditions for the concepts as well as with support for the initiatives. All in all it became clear that the cooperation to create successful concepts will be no sure-fire success. All involved groups are mutually responsible for analysing the special locally conditions and the creation of circumstances for integrated tenant tickets. On the basis of the findings in the project three types of tenant tickets will be developed from which a realisable concept will be presented: optional model, solidary model and ticket sharing. The optional model is based on a minimum purchase of tickets for the public transport by the housing company with granting a bulk discount by the transport company which is directly passed to the tenants. With the solidary model the involved households will be obliged to buy a tenant ticket. Higher discounts can be reached due to a mixed calculation with higher number of members in this case. The Ticketsharing model offers middle to very high discounts due to the division of a transmittable travel card through a separate member group. A focus at the concept development is the consideration of the special requirements to the implementation and the participation of the concerned stakeholders to guarantee the practicability. © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility the organizing committee of mobil.TUM 2016. Peer-review under responsibility of theoforganizing committee of mobil.TUM 2016. Keywords: tenant ticket; traffic management; public transport; multimodality
1. Context and objectives Four out of five daily trips start or end at the own home (MID 2008). The daily decision to go by foot, bicycle, public transport or car is reached at the residence and depends on the residential environment and housing situation (Verkehrsclub Österreich 2014). Mobility management for housing areas is understood as method that is developed for residents of specific living quarters or tenants of designated housing companies. They include a specific benefit for the target group in addition to the common services (Bäumer & Köllinger 2009), resulting in a win-win-situation for all participants: the transportation company can create new distribution channels via housing companies. A more
41
42
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
reliable planning security and a more reliable financing for the transportation company can be ensured. The resident or tenant receives special offer conditions. The housing association benefits from a customer friendly image (Bäumer 2009; Dittrich-Wesbuer & Reutter 2003). Diverse traffic offers, such as neighbourhood- related car sharing, services related to bicycle traffic and infrastructure for bicycle traffic and traffic by foot, availability improvement of public transport stops, should motivate the residents to use more often alternatives to their own car. Despite many good arguments, corresponding proposals are only rarely considered in mobility strategies. Housing companies first of all often concentrate on questions concerning the number of parking spaces. Apart from that, the quality assurance and improvement of the main product “home” is the day- to- day business of housing companies, hence services far from the main product are treated as subordinate, as long as they do not contribute to the marketability of existing housing (Bäumer et al. 2009). The aim of the project “DieMo RheinMain” was the development of implementable concepts for tenant tickets (discounted subscriptions for public transport for residents of designated living quarters or tenants of designated housing companies) in order to anchor public transport into the portfolio of housing companies. Thereby, different tenant tickets for different housing areas and housing situations have been developed. Those can also be combined with other mobility offers for housing areas, such as car sharing or pedelec rental. 2. Methods First of all, detailed research on transport offers for tenants have been carried out, especially, still existing and past existing offers have been analysed, evaluated and examined for the transfer potential. Thereby, especially the success factors and obstacles or reasons for terminating specific offers have been considered. By means of success factors, conditions for implementation and legal requirements, user- specific concepts have been developed and subsequently discussed by participating actors. For this purpose, a workshop with representatives of housing companies, communes, transport companies and tenants has been done. The aims of the workshop were the better use of potentials concerning the implementation of mobility management for housing areas and the cooperation of actors as well as the different viewpoints of participating actors and possible barriers. First, the respective representatives discussed in separated groups. Afterwards, it was discussed in plenary about expectations and use of tenant tickets, as well as, obstacles and distribution of roles. From the results, recommendations for action and different suitable concepts for tenant tickets have been developed. The concepts should consider different framework conditions for cities and communes as well as for residential districts and tenant structures, so that a tenant ticket can be established in many regions and in combination with other transport offers, such as e- car sharing. 3. Tenant tickets Tenant tickets can be understood as a housing- related transport offer for public transport, where tenants of designated housing companies or residents of a particular housing area are able to use reduced season tickets for public transport as facultative offer. In particular, housing areas, estate tickets with an obligatory character can be offered as well. The simplest offers (and so far realised the most), especially in the housing stock, are based on the principle of voluntariness (Gogol 2007). The voluntary model is the easiest model to implement for a tenant ticket. It is based on the principle of major customer discounts: The housing company acts as intermediary and buys a larger quantity of tickets to major customer prices, and passes them over to their tenants (Bäumer 2009). Solidary tenant tickets are models, in which the ticket purchase for a determined group of tenants or households is obligatory (Gogol 2007). The ticket is based on a student ticket or job ticket and generate a discount by a mixed calculation between frequent and spare users of public transport. 3.1. Requirements Tenant tickets are particularly suitable for housing areas that are well integrated into the public transport network. However, dependent on the individual mobility behaviour and the accessibility of individual destinations with public
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
transport, it is also suitable for other locations (Bäumer 2009). In cooperation with local transportation companies, not only the public transport service (through frequent service, buses etc.), but also the accessibility and feature quality of stops in housing areas can be improved. Apart from that, an excellent customer service with easy purchase opportunity for tenant tickets is essential, just as a reliable passenger information. 3.2. Effects The establishment of tenant ticket offers may result in a win- win- situation for all participants: The tenant benefits from cheaper public transport tickets and a bigger choice of transport mode. Furthermore, he gets a better access to public transport. Concerning the residential environment, through respective tenant ticket offers, potentials of general traffic reduction and saving parking facilities may arise. Housing companies may upgrade their main product “home” with respect to new offers. The same applies to transport companies. They may upgrade or make their product more attractive, so that they can gain new customers, bind existing customers for the better and longer and build up new distribution structures (Gogol 2007; Dittrich-Wesbuer 2003). Additionally, the transport company can also calculate with a fixed income due to a minimum purchase of tenant tickets. 3.3. Implementation The implementation of transport offers for tenants requires an intensive cooperation of all participants: housing companies, transportation companies, tenants and communes. Already realised transport offers for tenants have shown that single measures need time to be accepted and appreciated by residents (Bäumer et al 2009). For this reason, a constant support and supply of information to potential users is of high importance. Not all activities can be organised by housing companies alone. The commitment of tenants is also contributing to the success. The offers should be regularly adapted to the tenants’ needs. This happens through a close cooperation with the tenants. The required learning process should not be underestimated (Müller 2003). 3.4. Approach A standardised approach for the implementation of a ticket for tenants and residents does not exist. Due to very different circumstances in cities and quarters it is barely possible. If a housing company likes to offer such a product, following aspects need to be examined and processed (Bäumer 2009): x The primary aim is to identify the right contact person for tariffs. x The existing ticket offers, including special conditions for pupils, students, seniors and major customers, as well as related services need to be examined. x Selection of a ticket suitable for the tenant ticket; as far it is negotiable, additional services as transferability or the possibility for bicycle transport, can be arranged. x Signing of a cooperation contract between housing company and transportation company. x Specific communication measures to all addressed households that present the new product and its advantages. Additionally, an application form should be included. 3.5. Implementation examples In Bielefeld (Germany), a tenant ticket was established as pilot project by the Bielefelder Gemeinnützige Wohnungsbaugesellschaft (BGW) in cooperation with the moBiel GmbH (City of Bielefeld) and the Wohnungsbaugesellschaaft freie Scholle. The ticket is available in all price levels and with additional services. They relate to the key account offer of moBiel, which provides a 10 % discount for a minimum purchase of 100 tickets (Gogol 2007). A similar tenant ticket is already offered since 2003 by the VBW Bauen und Wohnen GmbH to its tenants in Bochum (Germany). This is a key account subscription of VBW, which offers its tenants tickets (annual subscription, all price levels) with an 11.5% discount. Each member of a household is able to receive a not- transferable tenant
43
44
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
ticket directly from the transportation company. Despite the cost advantages, the offer needs to be advertised intensively. In 2013, 1250 tenants were using this offer (Bäumer & Stiewe 2013; VBW Bochum 2012). In Zurich (Switzerland) the cooperative society Zurlinden is offering one season ticket of the transport association Zurich per household to tenants of the new residential park Sihlbogen. This is already included in the rent and is put out in form of a voucher valued one annual subscription for public transport. As accompanying measure, the number of parking spaces was reduced to the legal minimum; car ownership is only allowed to tenants with a special permission. Knowledge about the effects of these measures is still missing (Zurlinden 2013). 4. Results For this purpose, a workshop with representatives of housing companies, communes, transport companies and tenants has been done. The aims of the workshop were the better use of potentials concerning the implementation of mobility management for housing areas and the cooperation of actors as well as the different viewpoints of participating actors and possible barriers. From the results, recommendations for action and different suitable concepts for tenant tickets have been developed. 4.1. Workshop with participants For the better use of potentials with mobility management for housing areas, actors of housing industry, communities, transport providers and tenant associations were invited to a mutual exchange of information, opinions and ideas. Following questions have been discussed: x x x x x
What do you expect from traffic offers for housing areas? Which benefit do you expect from this? What are your requirements concerning these offers? Which obstacles do you fear with the implementation of respective offers? Who should take over which actions?
The housing companies were expecting advantages concerning the marketing of their flats. Nevertheless, they also emphasised that the topic traffic shall not be their original task; questions concerning the mobility management for housing areas may have lower priority. Furthermore, they saw the responsibility with the (municipal) policy, which should create framework conditions and relevant traffic concepts with opportunity to reduce parking spaces. Tenants were interested in offers that, when providing unchanged or increased, comfort costs were reduced (e.g. for an own parking space). Important are comprehensive information, a constant and reliable availability of offers as well as an easy access with the opportunity of uncomplicated testing. The communes were primarily expecting a saving of parking spaces and a reduction of vehicle traffic. Difficulties with a possibly decreased demand, obscurities with the reciprocal financing of relevant offers and implementation possibilities in built- up areas were expected as well. With the implementation of tenant tickets, transport companies were expecting more service users and a general strengthening of the environmental association. An easy access through combined offers with only one contact person for all offers and accessibility were seen as essential, which can only achieved through intensive cooperation of all participants. Data sovereignty and data protection, economic constraints and an unclear tariff structure can arise as problems when implementing the offer. The participants agreed that a networked offer with more services (e.g. public transport season ticket and e- car sharing) via mutual access would generate the most benefit, consequently, it should be considered in the concept development of tenant tickets. Both the housing companies and the communes see themselves in the mediation role between tenants and transportation companies. The development of role models, in which the responsibilities of the participants and interfaces are described, was seen as important step for the implementation, as well as an intensive cooperation of all actors. The differences between the urban and rural area and the respective framework conditions have to be considered. The question, if tenant tickets could be implemented and economically operated in rural areas, remained open.
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
4.2. Tenant ticket concepts Based on the results of the inventory, already implemented concepts and the workshop with participants, the following scenarios for tenant tickets were developed: voluntary tenant ticket, solidarity tenant ticket and ticket sharing. 4.2.1. Voluntary tenant ticket The voluntary model is the easiest model to implement for a tenant ticket. It is based on the principle of major customer discounts: The housing company acts as intermediary and buys a larger quantity of tickets to major customer prices, and passes them over to their tenants. Thereby, discounts from 10-15 % of the standard prices are possible; in case of larger user numbers they can be even higher. The special conditions vary in dependency of tariffs and normally need to be negotiated with the person responsible for tariffs (Bäumer 2009).The tenant ticket with optional usage can also be introduced to existing tenants and is not bound to a full traffic concept. It can also maintained in the longer term and should be used for a permanent implementation of the tenant ticket. The voluntary tenant ticket primarily adverts frequent users of public transport, who do not receive discounts, or occasional users, for who the purchase of a monthly or annual ticket at the normal price is financially not viable. The advantages of the offer depend on the number of tickets and a minimum purchase of tickets. Therefore, this offer is not suitable for individual landlords or very small housing companies with a few flats. With medium effort in existing and new building projects, it is definitely feasible. Data protection is guaranteed since the housing company acts as sales partner and data is only exchanged between housing companies and tenants, whereby no further data needs to be collected, apart from the rental agreement. The tenant’s data will not be shared with third parties. The transferability of the ticket is legally questionable, because also non- tenants of the housing company could potentially receive the discounted ticket (Berliner Mieterverein 2005). The establishment of a functioning voluntary tenant ticket requires an intensive cooperation between transport providers and housing associations, occasionally also between the communes and tenants. The initiative for implementing a voluntary tenant ticket can be realised not only through the housing company but also through the transport company. The commune acts as coordinating partner and should support relevant offers. First of all, concrete arrangements with the housing company and the transport company should be made. This particularly concerns the type of the offered ticket, the minimum number, additional services and the key customer discount, which needs to be agreed. Thereby, all tickets that can possibly be purchased, should be considered. However, the possibility of transferable tickets is excluded here. The housing company takes over the sale and coordination of the offer. Each interested tenant can apply for the discounted tenant ticket at the housing company. With the received applications, the housing company is able to purchase the tickets from the transport company. The tenant pays the ticket fee to the housing company, which takes the financial risks in case of debt default or missing the minimum purchase number. Additionally, financial efforts come up with the ticket sale and offer advertising. Financial compensation can be partly realised when passing on a smaller discount to the tenants, as originally agreed with the transport company. The offer needs to be promoted intensively, through the transport company as well as through the housing company. For the success of a voluntary ticket, accompanying measures and the embedding into a traffic concept are not necessarily required, but may, in combination with the tenant ticket, contribute to a mutual increase of attractiveness. In particular, special conditions (e.g. exclusive access, decree of the application fee) in regard to the accompanying measures could be offered. The possible measures include the location- related, station- bound car sharing (with ecars). Here, the housing company should be cooperate intensively with the car sharing- company and the commune. When considering new- building projects, this needs to be done early in the planning process. Space in existing housing should be found for the offer implementation. Special offer conditions should be negotiated for the tenants. Financing will take place via compensation payments from the car sharing- company or via savings from parking spaces. 4.2.2. Solidary tenant ticket The Solidary model is a model, in which the ticket purchase for a determined group of tenants or households is obligatory. An easy very good access to public transport is required for the solidary model, the requirements therefore must be accomplished by the commune and realised through the transport company. The offer conditions have to be
45
46
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
negotiated between the transport company and the housing company and include regularly a mixed calculation between frequent and spare users of public transport. The costs of the tenant ticket should be charged with the monthly rent, so that the tenant has no further efforts concerning the ticket purchase. The ticket is only implementable for new building projects or completely neighborhood- related new letting, since, on legal ground “pacta sunt servanda” (lat.: contracts must be respected, cf. § 145 BGB), an obligatory tenant ticket could not be inserted subsequently unilateral into existing rental agreements. A gradual introduction for new lettings in the housing stock is not possible since different requirements and duties for existing and new tenants would lead to discrimination. The integration of the solidarity ticket in general rental agreements exists through the mutual bill of the basic rent. Here, the housing company could charge an additional (not separately accounted) fee on top of the net cold rent (within the locally comparable rent, if exists, cf. § 558 BGB). In return, the tenant would receive the tenant ticket without any further cost. This must not be included as additional clause into the rental contract. This results in a unilateral termination option when the offer should terminate. A ticket transferability should only be possible to other household members. Otherwise, single non- tenants of the housing company would be able to receive the ticket, which leads to a discrimination risk (cf. Berliner Mieterverein 2005). The development of a functioning voluntary tenant ticket requires an intensive cooperation between transport companies, housing associations and communes. There, the housing association cannot run the offer alone. Since the establishment of a solidarity tenant ticket develops within new building projects, all actors should be early involved into the planning. Afterwards, the housing company and the transport provider should make concrete arrangements relating to the tariff product. This applies especially to the territorial validity of the offered ticket. Additional services, such as bicycle transport, are reasonable. The housing company takes over the sale and coordination of the offer. The tenant receives the tenant ticket from the housing company and returns it when he moves out. The housing company purchases the tickets from the transport provider beforehand and charges the fee for them included in the rent afterwards. Consequently, the tenant has no further efforts to make. The integration of the solidarity tenant ticket in a traffic concept for housing areas can substantially contribute to the success of the tenant ticket and the traffic concept. For a planned traffic concept, the tenant ticket should be already considered within the building development planning. Here, the commune is responsible for traffic and building law regulations. Moreover, a possibility to reduce parking spaces should be realised. A promising accompanying measure includes the implementation of neighbourhood- related station- bound car sharing (with e-cars). Therefore, the housing company has to negotiate on the implementation and the long- lasting service of stations and on special offer conditions for the tenants (e.g. exclusive access, decree of the application fee) and provide car sharing parking spaces. The latter should be done in cooperation with the communes. Another accompanying measure could be a stationbound bike rental system with e- bikes that is set up exclusively and only accessible for the residents of participating quarters. The rental bikes should be offered in enclosed and weather- resistant premises. Access and rent could organised via mobility card which can simultaneously function as tenant ticket as well. The housing company is also responsible for the supply of necessary space, the access guarantee and the integration of the communes into the planning. The commune is accompanying the planning process. 4.2.3. Ticket sharing Ticket sharing is oriented towards existing car sharing models. Determined user groups (e.g. residents from a district or residents from a single housing unit) are provided with transferrable season tickets for public transport that can be borrowed as required and are shared with all users. The access is limited to the residents from a district. With ticket sharing price advantages of a discounted season ticket, can also be used for occasional journeys and thus, costs can be saved. The ticket sharing model first of all addresses non users and infrequent users of public transport. It is attractive for tenants when there exists a high ticket availability. Through sharing, the acquisition costs are distributed among all users. The success and the advantages of the offer are not dependent on the ticket number or a minimum purchase of tickets. Therefore, this model is especially suitable for a mixed tenant structure and for a single residential building and individual landlords. It is relatively easy to realise, both for existing and new letting. The establishment and operation of this ticket model can be realised without participation of communes and transport companies. Considering legal aspects, there are only few or no obstacles for implementing ticket sharing. For all tenants of the participating houses, it should be guaranteed a non- discriminatory access. Obligating the tenant to participate in ticket
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
sharing is not possible (cf. solidarity model in this paper). For this reason, an exclusive access to the tenant tickets has to be guaranteed to all participating tenants. Apart from that, there were no further legal concerns. First of all, the landlord needs to install and operate a key box with appropriate technical features inside the building that regulates the access, the lending and the registration of the user. Depending on the expecting ticket usage and number of participating households, an appropriate number of transferable tickets need to be purchased and provides by the landlord. When setting the tariff for the tenants, it needs to be considered that, on the one hand, the price for permanent use shall be unattractively high to prevent a malpractice of the ticket, and on the other hand, prices per journey shall be lower than single ticket prices. In the course of this, the landlord has the opportunity to split the costs for the purchase and distribution of tickets on the users. Hence, he can refinance the costs for the offer completely. A minimum number of participating households per building is necessary to guarantee a refinancing for the landlord or to be worth it for the tenant. For housing associations with more participating residential buildings or quarters, the minimum number of participants per building is irrelevant when considering the profitability, because building with more participants compensate the ones with less participants. In addition to that, residential building could also share tickets and key boxes. For the success of ticket sharing, accompanying measures and the embedding into a traffic concept are not necessarily required, but may, in combination with the tenant ticket, contribute to a mutual increase of attractiveness. In particular, special conditions (e.g. exclusive access, decree of the application fee) in regard to the accompanying measures could be offered to tenant ticket holders. Neighbourhood- related car- sharing can be seen as substantial accompanying measure: The housing association provides a parking space to the car sharing company, which cares for an exclusive access and special offer conditions for tenants. The offer is especially suitable for new building projects, but can also be realised with existing buildings. When considering new building projects and the embedding into the traffic concept, the communes need to be involved early into the planning process, because they have to create a possible reduction of parking spaces. As a result, financial resources for creating parking spaces can be saved and passed over to the tenants via special offer conditions. Another possible accompanying measure could be a stationbound bike rental system with e- bikes that is set up exclusively and only accessible for the residents of participating quarters. The rental bikes should be offered in enclosed and weather- resistant premises. Access and rent could organized via mobility card which can simultaneously function as tenant ticket as well. 5. Résumé and prospects The establishment of tenant ticket offers may result in a win- win- situation for all participants, but are currently little considered as possibility to connect housing and transport. The developed models for tenant tickets, voluntary tenant ticket, solidary tenant ticket and ticket sharing, consider different residential areas, number of tenants, stock or new building and further influencing factors that a tenant ticket can be establish in many residential areas. Table 1. Overview of the tenant tickets model
voluntary
solidary
sharing
functionality
minimum purchase of tickets and discount transfer to tenants
mixed calculation between frequent and spare users of public transport
sharing of a transferable season ticket by user group
ticket purchase
optional
obligatory
optional
discount related to season ticket price
low
high
medium to very high
target group
all tenants of the housing company
all tenants of the housing company or residential area
tenants of individual living quarters, community associations
implementation
stock and new building
new building only
stock and new building
further measures (sample)
station- bound carsharing with open access
station- bound carsharing with open access
neighbourhood- related carsharing
open Pedelec rental
neighbourhood- related carsharing
open Pedelec rental
open Pedelec rental
neighbourhood- related Pedelec rental
47
48
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
The existing examples for tenant tickets and experiences from past initiatives shows the high potential and the positive effects for all actors. But there must be attend also requirements, approaches and surmount difficulties to reach a long term success. With a good and intensive cooperation between all actors are tenant tickets a particularly promising measure of the mobility management. References Bäumer, D. (2003). Mobilitätsservice für die VBW Bauen und Wohnen GmbH. In: U. Reutter & R. Penczek (ed.), Mieterticket & Co. – Erfolgsfaktoren siedlungsbezogener Mobilitätsdienstleistungen, 8–14. Dortmund: ILS –Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development. Bäumer, D. (2009). Preiswerte ÖPNV-Tickets für Mieter und Bewohner bestimmter Quartiere oder Wohnungsbestände. Retrieved from: http://addhome.eu/docs/ILS_ticket_for_tenants_guidelines_DE.pdf, 13.03.2015. Bäumer, D. et.al. (2009). Mobility meets housing. Retrieved from: http://addhome.eu/docs/ADDHOME_brochure_mobility_meets_housing_germany_final.pdf, 16.03.2015. Bäumer, D. & Köllinger, C. (2009). Einführung – Das Projekt Add-Home. In: ILS –Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development (ed.), Wohnstandortbezogenes Mobilitätsmanagement – Projektdokumentation des EU-Projektes Add Home, 2–3. Dortmund: author’s edition. Bäumer, D., Reutter, U. & Reudenbach, L. (2008). Mobilität trifft Wohnen – Eine aussichtsreiche Begegnung. Dortmund: ILS –Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development. Bäumer, D. & Stiewe , M. (2013). Klimaverträglich mobil in Zeichen des demografischen Wandels – wie wohnen Mobilität bestimmt. In: Proceedings REAL CORP 2013, 475 – 484. Rom Berliner Mieterverein (2005). Wohnumfeld und Autos. Retrieved from: http://www.berlinermieterverein.de/magazin/online/mm0305/030514.htm, 06.05.2015 BGB (2015). Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch. In: Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (ed.). Berlin: author’s edition. Last amended: 20.11.2015 Dittrich-Wesbuer, A. & Reutter, U. (2003). Von der Idee zur Umsetzung – Erfolgsfaktoren siedlungsbezogener Mobilitätsdienstleistungen. In: U. Reutter & R. Penczek (ed.), Mieterticket & Co. – Erfolgsfaktoren siedlungsbezogener Mobilitätsdienstleistungen, 8–14. Dortmund: ILS – Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development. Gogol, A. (2007). Evaluation zielgruppenspezifischer Mobilitätsdienstleistungen von Wohnungsunternehmen. In: Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung und Bauwesen des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (ed.)., Dortmund: author’s edition. Mobilität in Deutschland (MID) (2008). Database of MID 2008. www.mobilitaet-in-deutschland.de. moBiel GmbH & Bielefelder Gemeinnützige Wohnungsgesellschaft mbH (2015). Bitte einsteigen – das BGW-Mieterticket für Bus und Bahn. Retrieved from: http://www.bgw-bielefeld.de/mieten-wohnen/lexikon-mieten-wohnen/m/mieterticket-fuer-bus-und-bahn.html, 13.11.2015. Müller, G. (2003). Von der Reiseauskunft zum Mieterticket…Ideen und Anwendungsfelder des siedlungsbezogenen Mobilitätsmanagements. In: U. Reutter & R. Penczek (ed.), Mieterticket & Co. – Erfolgsfaktoren siedlungsbezogener Mobilitätsdienstleistungen, 23–30. Dortmund: ILS – Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development. VBW (2015). The tenant ticket of the VBW Bauen und Wohnen in Bochum. Retrieved from: http://www.vbw-bochum.de/service/rund-umswohnen, 13.11.2015. Verkehrsclub Österreich VCÖ – Mobilität mit Zukunft (2014). Wohnen bewegt Menschen. In: VCÖ-Magazin. – 6 (2014), 5, 1. Wien Zurlinden (2013). Der Sihlbogen in Zürich-Leimbach. Retrieved from: http://www.bgzurlinden.ch/projekte/fileadmin/user_upload/Sihlbogen/Medien/Zuerich2_14112013.pdf, 06.05.2015
ScienceDirect Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
International Scientific Conference on Mobility and Transport Transforming Urban Mobility, mobil.TUM 2016, 6-7 June 2016, Munich, Germany
Concepts for tenant tickets for connecting habitation and transport Prof. Dr. Carsten Sommer , Franz Lambrecht * University of Kassel, Chair of Transportation Planning and Traffic Systems, Mönchebergstraße 7, 34125 Kassel,Germany
Abstract About 85% of the daily trips start or end at the own home (MID 2008). The decision to go by foot, bicycle, public transport or car is reached at the residence and depends on the residential environment and housing situation. There are thoughts about alternative financing models to make the public transport more popular on this decision. This can be considered in traffic management for housing areas like student tickets and job tickets. Mobility management for housing areas is understood as method that are developed for residents of specific living quarters or tenants of designated housing companies. They include a specific benefit for the target group in addition to the common services (Bäumer & Köllinger 2009), resulting in a win-win-situation for all participants: the customers get a cheaper access to the public transport and further transport services as well as more options with the choice of transport mode. The transportation company enhances his service, acquires new customers and can plan with solid collection of fees. A more liveable environment through the reduction of the car traffic and parking spaces can be created in the commune. The landlords and housing companies enhance their main product “home”, can reach a better customer loyalty and recovery as well as save costs with parking facilities in development areas. (Bäumer, Reutter & Reudenbach 2008; Dittrich-Wesbuer & Reutter 2003; et.al.) Despite many good arguments, corresponding proposals are only rarely considered in mobility strategies. Because of this a tenant ticket will be developed in the research project DieMo RheinMain. The project is funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). Tenant tickets are fare reduced season tickets for public transport for residents of designated housing areas or renter of designated housing companies. The tenant ticket implements the public transport consistently into the proposal of housing companies based on integrated fares and sales channel and provides an access to the public transport with the rent payment. Within the project usable concepts and transferable recommendations for tenant tickets will be developed. Those consider also possible problems with implementation with the aim of reaching an easier and stronger connection between habitation and transport as well as providing the residents bigger possibilities in the choice of
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49-561-804-3279; fax: +49-561-804-7382. E-mail address: [email protected]
2352-1465 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of mobil.TUM 2016. doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2016.12.066
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
transport mode. Beside a reduction potential at the transport performance of vehicles and the environmental pollution shall also facilitated the economisation of parking space. Different concepts for tenant tickets (voluntary models and solidary models) will be developed to consider special needs of the customers and different local conditions. Previous activities in mobility management for housing areas will be investigated and parallels will be searched for general mobility management concepts to find solutions. There will be included previous activities and tried concepts of the past as well. At a first workshop with tenant associations, housing companies, municipalities and transport companies all stakeholders come together and discuss in separate groups and the plenum about requirements and expectations of transport services connected with habitation as well as barriers and possible arrangements of services. Different concepts of tenant tickets will be developed from the results of the workshop and the previous investigations. They will be presented to the stakeholders at a second workshop and validated to their practicability. There were already some implemented concepts for tenant tickets but many of them have already been closed. Especially juridical obstacles complicate or obstruct the implementation of traffic concepts. Furthermore the success has often been blocked by insufficient participation and cooperation of the stakeholders as well as missing acceptance. The most realised services, especially at the housing stock, are based on the concept of voluntariness. There is a successful examples in Bielefeld/Germany (moBiel & BGW 2015). The tenants of the “Bielefelder Gemeinnützige Wohnungsbaugesellschaft” can buy a tenant ticket since 2005 which is available for all price levels and is granted with a 10% discount. A similar tenant ticket is offered by the “VBW Bauen und Wohnen” for their tenants at Bochum/Germany, who can buy a season ticket with an 11.5% discount (Bäumer 2003; VBW 2015). The already implemented examples indicate that an intensive cooperation between the stakeholders with settling the financing and distribution, inclusion of tenants and an intensive marketing is particularly necessary for the success. A good service of the public transport, fully accessibility to the services and an easy purchase option is essential as well. Implemented activities need time for an acceptance of the residents. At the workshop with the stakeholders all participants agreed that connections with further services (such as car sharing) over a common access achieve the highest benefit for the tenants. In addition the politics will be held accountable to improve the conditions for the concepts as well as with support for the initiatives. All in all it became clear that the cooperation to create successful concepts will be no sure-fire success. All involved groups are mutually responsible for analysing the special locally conditions and the creation of circumstances for integrated tenant tickets. On the basis of the findings in the project three types of tenant tickets will be developed from which a realisable concept will be presented: optional model, solidary model and ticket sharing. The optional model is based on a minimum purchase of tickets for the public transport by the housing company with granting a bulk discount by the transport company which is directly passed to the tenants. With the solidary model the involved households will be obliged to buy a tenant ticket. Higher discounts can be reached due to a mixed calculation with higher number of members in this case. The Ticketsharing model offers middle to very high discounts due to the division of a transmittable travel card through a separate member group. A focus at the concept development is the consideration of the special requirements to the implementation and the participation of the concerned stakeholders to guarantee the practicability. © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility the organizing committee of mobil.TUM 2016. Peer-review under responsibility of theoforganizing committee of mobil.TUM 2016. Keywords: tenant ticket; traffic management; public transport; multimodality
1. Context and objectives Four out of five daily trips start or end at the own home (MID 2008). The daily decision to go by foot, bicycle, public transport or car is reached at the residence and depends on the residential environment and housing situation (Verkehrsclub Österreich 2014). Mobility management for housing areas is understood as method that is developed for residents of specific living quarters or tenants of designated housing companies. They include a specific benefit for the target group in addition to the common services (Bäumer & Köllinger 2009), resulting in a win-win-situation for all participants: the transportation company can create new distribution channels via housing companies. A more
41
42
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
reliable planning security and a more reliable financing for the transportation company can be ensured. The resident or tenant receives special offer conditions. The housing association benefits from a customer friendly image (Bäumer 2009; Dittrich-Wesbuer & Reutter 2003). Diverse traffic offers, such as neighbourhood- related car sharing, services related to bicycle traffic and infrastructure for bicycle traffic and traffic by foot, availability improvement of public transport stops, should motivate the residents to use more often alternatives to their own car. Despite many good arguments, corresponding proposals are only rarely considered in mobility strategies. Housing companies first of all often concentrate on questions concerning the number of parking spaces. Apart from that, the quality assurance and improvement of the main product “home” is the day- to- day business of housing companies, hence services far from the main product are treated as subordinate, as long as they do not contribute to the marketability of existing housing (Bäumer et al. 2009). The aim of the project “DieMo RheinMain” was the development of implementable concepts for tenant tickets (discounted subscriptions for public transport for residents of designated living quarters or tenants of designated housing companies) in order to anchor public transport into the portfolio of housing companies. Thereby, different tenant tickets for different housing areas and housing situations have been developed. Those can also be combined with other mobility offers for housing areas, such as car sharing or pedelec rental. 2. Methods First of all, detailed research on transport offers for tenants have been carried out, especially, still existing and past existing offers have been analysed, evaluated and examined for the transfer potential. Thereby, especially the success factors and obstacles or reasons for terminating specific offers have been considered. By means of success factors, conditions for implementation and legal requirements, user- specific concepts have been developed and subsequently discussed by participating actors. For this purpose, a workshop with representatives of housing companies, communes, transport companies and tenants has been done. The aims of the workshop were the better use of potentials concerning the implementation of mobility management for housing areas and the cooperation of actors as well as the different viewpoints of participating actors and possible barriers. First, the respective representatives discussed in separated groups. Afterwards, it was discussed in plenary about expectations and use of tenant tickets, as well as, obstacles and distribution of roles. From the results, recommendations for action and different suitable concepts for tenant tickets have been developed. The concepts should consider different framework conditions for cities and communes as well as for residential districts and tenant structures, so that a tenant ticket can be established in many regions and in combination with other transport offers, such as e- car sharing. 3. Tenant tickets Tenant tickets can be understood as a housing- related transport offer for public transport, where tenants of designated housing companies or residents of a particular housing area are able to use reduced season tickets for public transport as facultative offer. In particular, housing areas, estate tickets with an obligatory character can be offered as well. The simplest offers (and so far realised the most), especially in the housing stock, are based on the principle of voluntariness (Gogol 2007). The voluntary model is the easiest model to implement for a tenant ticket. It is based on the principle of major customer discounts: The housing company acts as intermediary and buys a larger quantity of tickets to major customer prices, and passes them over to their tenants (Bäumer 2009). Solidary tenant tickets are models, in which the ticket purchase for a determined group of tenants or households is obligatory (Gogol 2007). The ticket is based on a student ticket or job ticket and generate a discount by a mixed calculation between frequent and spare users of public transport. 3.1. Requirements Tenant tickets are particularly suitable for housing areas that are well integrated into the public transport network. However, dependent on the individual mobility behaviour and the accessibility of individual destinations with public
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
transport, it is also suitable for other locations (Bäumer 2009). In cooperation with local transportation companies, not only the public transport service (through frequent service, buses etc.), but also the accessibility and feature quality of stops in housing areas can be improved. Apart from that, an excellent customer service with easy purchase opportunity for tenant tickets is essential, just as a reliable passenger information. 3.2. Effects The establishment of tenant ticket offers may result in a win- win- situation for all participants: The tenant benefits from cheaper public transport tickets and a bigger choice of transport mode. Furthermore, he gets a better access to public transport. Concerning the residential environment, through respective tenant ticket offers, potentials of general traffic reduction and saving parking facilities may arise. Housing companies may upgrade their main product “home” with respect to new offers. The same applies to transport companies. They may upgrade or make their product more attractive, so that they can gain new customers, bind existing customers for the better and longer and build up new distribution structures (Gogol 2007; Dittrich-Wesbuer 2003). Additionally, the transport company can also calculate with a fixed income due to a minimum purchase of tenant tickets. 3.3. Implementation The implementation of transport offers for tenants requires an intensive cooperation of all participants: housing companies, transportation companies, tenants and communes. Already realised transport offers for tenants have shown that single measures need time to be accepted and appreciated by residents (Bäumer et al 2009). For this reason, a constant support and supply of information to potential users is of high importance. Not all activities can be organised by housing companies alone. The commitment of tenants is also contributing to the success. The offers should be regularly adapted to the tenants’ needs. This happens through a close cooperation with the tenants. The required learning process should not be underestimated (Müller 2003). 3.4. Approach A standardised approach for the implementation of a ticket for tenants and residents does not exist. Due to very different circumstances in cities and quarters it is barely possible. If a housing company likes to offer such a product, following aspects need to be examined and processed (Bäumer 2009): x The primary aim is to identify the right contact person for tariffs. x The existing ticket offers, including special conditions for pupils, students, seniors and major customers, as well as related services need to be examined. x Selection of a ticket suitable for the tenant ticket; as far it is negotiable, additional services as transferability or the possibility for bicycle transport, can be arranged. x Signing of a cooperation contract between housing company and transportation company. x Specific communication measures to all addressed households that present the new product and its advantages. Additionally, an application form should be included. 3.5. Implementation examples In Bielefeld (Germany), a tenant ticket was established as pilot project by the Bielefelder Gemeinnützige Wohnungsbaugesellschaft (BGW) in cooperation with the moBiel GmbH (City of Bielefeld) and the Wohnungsbaugesellschaaft freie Scholle. The ticket is available in all price levels and with additional services. They relate to the key account offer of moBiel, which provides a 10 % discount for a minimum purchase of 100 tickets (Gogol 2007). A similar tenant ticket is already offered since 2003 by the VBW Bauen und Wohnen GmbH to its tenants in Bochum (Germany). This is a key account subscription of VBW, which offers its tenants tickets (annual subscription, all price levels) with an 11.5% discount. Each member of a household is able to receive a not- transferable tenant
43
44
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
ticket directly from the transportation company. Despite the cost advantages, the offer needs to be advertised intensively. In 2013, 1250 tenants were using this offer (Bäumer & Stiewe 2013; VBW Bochum 2012). In Zurich (Switzerland) the cooperative society Zurlinden is offering one season ticket of the transport association Zurich per household to tenants of the new residential park Sihlbogen. This is already included in the rent and is put out in form of a voucher valued one annual subscription for public transport. As accompanying measure, the number of parking spaces was reduced to the legal minimum; car ownership is only allowed to tenants with a special permission. Knowledge about the effects of these measures is still missing (Zurlinden 2013). 4. Results For this purpose, a workshop with representatives of housing companies, communes, transport companies and tenants has been done. The aims of the workshop were the better use of potentials concerning the implementation of mobility management for housing areas and the cooperation of actors as well as the different viewpoints of participating actors and possible barriers. From the results, recommendations for action and different suitable concepts for tenant tickets have been developed. 4.1. Workshop with participants For the better use of potentials with mobility management for housing areas, actors of housing industry, communities, transport providers and tenant associations were invited to a mutual exchange of information, opinions and ideas. Following questions have been discussed: x x x x x
What do you expect from traffic offers for housing areas? Which benefit do you expect from this? What are your requirements concerning these offers? Which obstacles do you fear with the implementation of respective offers? Who should take over which actions?
The housing companies were expecting advantages concerning the marketing of their flats. Nevertheless, they also emphasised that the topic traffic shall not be their original task; questions concerning the mobility management for housing areas may have lower priority. Furthermore, they saw the responsibility with the (municipal) policy, which should create framework conditions and relevant traffic concepts with opportunity to reduce parking spaces. Tenants were interested in offers that, when providing unchanged or increased, comfort costs were reduced (e.g. for an own parking space). Important are comprehensive information, a constant and reliable availability of offers as well as an easy access with the opportunity of uncomplicated testing. The communes were primarily expecting a saving of parking spaces and a reduction of vehicle traffic. Difficulties with a possibly decreased demand, obscurities with the reciprocal financing of relevant offers and implementation possibilities in built- up areas were expected as well. With the implementation of tenant tickets, transport companies were expecting more service users and a general strengthening of the environmental association. An easy access through combined offers with only one contact person for all offers and accessibility were seen as essential, which can only achieved through intensive cooperation of all participants. Data sovereignty and data protection, economic constraints and an unclear tariff structure can arise as problems when implementing the offer. The participants agreed that a networked offer with more services (e.g. public transport season ticket and e- car sharing) via mutual access would generate the most benefit, consequently, it should be considered in the concept development of tenant tickets. Both the housing companies and the communes see themselves in the mediation role between tenants and transportation companies. The development of role models, in which the responsibilities of the participants and interfaces are described, was seen as important step for the implementation, as well as an intensive cooperation of all actors. The differences between the urban and rural area and the respective framework conditions have to be considered. The question, if tenant tickets could be implemented and economically operated in rural areas, remained open.
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
4.2. Tenant ticket concepts Based on the results of the inventory, already implemented concepts and the workshop with participants, the following scenarios for tenant tickets were developed: voluntary tenant ticket, solidarity tenant ticket and ticket sharing. 4.2.1. Voluntary tenant ticket The voluntary model is the easiest model to implement for a tenant ticket. It is based on the principle of major customer discounts: The housing company acts as intermediary and buys a larger quantity of tickets to major customer prices, and passes them over to their tenants. Thereby, discounts from 10-15 % of the standard prices are possible; in case of larger user numbers they can be even higher. The special conditions vary in dependency of tariffs and normally need to be negotiated with the person responsible for tariffs (Bäumer 2009).The tenant ticket with optional usage can also be introduced to existing tenants and is not bound to a full traffic concept. It can also maintained in the longer term and should be used for a permanent implementation of the tenant ticket. The voluntary tenant ticket primarily adverts frequent users of public transport, who do not receive discounts, or occasional users, for who the purchase of a monthly or annual ticket at the normal price is financially not viable. The advantages of the offer depend on the number of tickets and a minimum purchase of tickets. Therefore, this offer is not suitable for individual landlords or very small housing companies with a few flats. With medium effort in existing and new building projects, it is definitely feasible. Data protection is guaranteed since the housing company acts as sales partner and data is only exchanged between housing companies and tenants, whereby no further data needs to be collected, apart from the rental agreement. The tenant’s data will not be shared with third parties. The transferability of the ticket is legally questionable, because also non- tenants of the housing company could potentially receive the discounted ticket (Berliner Mieterverein 2005). The establishment of a functioning voluntary tenant ticket requires an intensive cooperation between transport providers and housing associations, occasionally also between the communes and tenants. The initiative for implementing a voluntary tenant ticket can be realised not only through the housing company but also through the transport company. The commune acts as coordinating partner and should support relevant offers. First of all, concrete arrangements with the housing company and the transport company should be made. This particularly concerns the type of the offered ticket, the minimum number, additional services and the key customer discount, which needs to be agreed. Thereby, all tickets that can possibly be purchased, should be considered. However, the possibility of transferable tickets is excluded here. The housing company takes over the sale and coordination of the offer. Each interested tenant can apply for the discounted tenant ticket at the housing company. With the received applications, the housing company is able to purchase the tickets from the transport company. The tenant pays the ticket fee to the housing company, which takes the financial risks in case of debt default or missing the minimum purchase number. Additionally, financial efforts come up with the ticket sale and offer advertising. Financial compensation can be partly realised when passing on a smaller discount to the tenants, as originally agreed with the transport company. The offer needs to be promoted intensively, through the transport company as well as through the housing company. For the success of a voluntary ticket, accompanying measures and the embedding into a traffic concept are not necessarily required, but may, in combination with the tenant ticket, contribute to a mutual increase of attractiveness. In particular, special conditions (e.g. exclusive access, decree of the application fee) in regard to the accompanying measures could be offered. The possible measures include the location- related, station- bound car sharing (with ecars). Here, the housing company should be cooperate intensively with the car sharing- company and the commune. When considering new- building projects, this needs to be done early in the planning process. Space in existing housing should be found for the offer implementation. Special offer conditions should be negotiated for the tenants. Financing will take place via compensation payments from the car sharing- company or via savings from parking spaces. 4.2.2. Solidary tenant ticket The Solidary model is a model, in which the ticket purchase for a determined group of tenants or households is obligatory. An easy very good access to public transport is required for the solidary model, the requirements therefore must be accomplished by the commune and realised through the transport company. The offer conditions have to be
45
46
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
negotiated between the transport company and the housing company and include regularly a mixed calculation between frequent and spare users of public transport. The costs of the tenant ticket should be charged with the monthly rent, so that the tenant has no further efforts concerning the ticket purchase. The ticket is only implementable for new building projects or completely neighborhood- related new letting, since, on legal ground “pacta sunt servanda” (lat.: contracts must be respected, cf. § 145 BGB), an obligatory tenant ticket could not be inserted subsequently unilateral into existing rental agreements. A gradual introduction for new lettings in the housing stock is not possible since different requirements and duties for existing and new tenants would lead to discrimination. The integration of the solidarity ticket in general rental agreements exists through the mutual bill of the basic rent. Here, the housing company could charge an additional (not separately accounted) fee on top of the net cold rent (within the locally comparable rent, if exists, cf. § 558 BGB). In return, the tenant would receive the tenant ticket without any further cost. This must not be included as additional clause into the rental contract. This results in a unilateral termination option when the offer should terminate. A ticket transferability should only be possible to other household members. Otherwise, single non- tenants of the housing company would be able to receive the ticket, which leads to a discrimination risk (cf. Berliner Mieterverein 2005). The development of a functioning voluntary tenant ticket requires an intensive cooperation between transport companies, housing associations and communes. There, the housing association cannot run the offer alone. Since the establishment of a solidarity tenant ticket develops within new building projects, all actors should be early involved into the planning. Afterwards, the housing company and the transport provider should make concrete arrangements relating to the tariff product. This applies especially to the territorial validity of the offered ticket. Additional services, such as bicycle transport, are reasonable. The housing company takes over the sale and coordination of the offer. The tenant receives the tenant ticket from the housing company and returns it when he moves out. The housing company purchases the tickets from the transport provider beforehand and charges the fee for them included in the rent afterwards. Consequently, the tenant has no further efforts to make. The integration of the solidarity tenant ticket in a traffic concept for housing areas can substantially contribute to the success of the tenant ticket and the traffic concept. For a planned traffic concept, the tenant ticket should be already considered within the building development planning. Here, the commune is responsible for traffic and building law regulations. Moreover, a possibility to reduce parking spaces should be realised. A promising accompanying measure includes the implementation of neighbourhood- related station- bound car sharing (with e-cars). Therefore, the housing company has to negotiate on the implementation and the long- lasting service of stations and on special offer conditions for the tenants (e.g. exclusive access, decree of the application fee) and provide car sharing parking spaces. The latter should be done in cooperation with the communes. Another accompanying measure could be a stationbound bike rental system with e- bikes that is set up exclusively and only accessible for the residents of participating quarters. The rental bikes should be offered in enclosed and weather- resistant premises. Access and rent could organised via mobility card which can simultaneously function as tenant ticket as well. The housing company is also responsible for the supply of necessary space, the access guarantee and the integration of the communes into the planning. The commune is accompanying the planning process. 4.2.3. Ticket sharing Ticket sharing is oriented towards existing car sharing models. Determined user groups (e.g. residents from a district or residents from a single housing unit) are provided with transferrable season tickets for public transport that can be borrowed as required and are shared with all users. The access is limited to the residents from a district. With ticket sharing price advantages of a discounted season ticket, can also be used for occasional journeys and thus, costs can be saved. The ticket sharing model first of all addresses non users and infrequent users of public transport. It is attractive for tenants when there exists a high ticket availability. Through sharing, the acquisition costs are distributed among all users. The success and the advantages of the offer are not dependent on the ticket number or a minimum purchase of tickets. Therefore, this model is especially suitable for a mixed tenant structure and for a single residential building and individual landlords. It is relatively easy to realise, both for existing and new letting. The establishment and operation of this ticket model can be realised without participation of communes and transport companies. Considering legal aspects, there are only few or no obstacles for implementing ticket sharing. For all tenants of the participating houses, it should be guaranteed a non- discriminatory access. Obligating the tenant to participate in ticket
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
sharing is not possible (cf. solidarity model in this paper). For this reason, an exclusive access to the tenant tickets has to be guaranteed to all participating tenants. Apart from that, there were no further legal concerns. First of all, the landlord needs to install and operate a key box with appropriate technical features inside the building that regulates the access, the lending and the registration of the user. Depending on the expecting ticket usage and number of participating households, an appropriate number of transferable tickets need to be purchased and provides by the landlord. When setting the tariff for the tenants, it needs to be considered that, on the one hand, the price for permanent use shall be unattractively high to prevent a malpractice of the ticket, and on the other hand, prices per journey shall be lower than single ticket prices. In the course of this, the landlord has the opportunity to split the costs for the purchase and distribution of tickets on the users. Hence, he can refinance the costs for the offer completely. A minimum number of participating households per building is necessary to guarantee a refinancing for the landlord or to be worth it for the tenant. For housing associations with more participating residential buildings or quarters, the minimum number of participants per building is irrelevant when considering the profitability, because building with more participants compensate the ones with less participants. In addition to that, residential building could also share tickets and key boxes. For the success of ticket sharing, accompanying measures and the embedding into a traffic concept are not necessarily required, but may, in combination with the tenant ticket, contribute to a mutual increase of attractiveness. In particular, special conditions (e.g. exclusive access, decree of the application fee) in regard to the accompanying measures could be offered to tenant ticket holders. Neighbourhood- related car- sharing can be seen as substantial accompanying measure: The housing association provides a parking space to the car sharing company, which cares for an exclusive access and special offer conditions for tenants. The offer is especially suitable for new building projects, but can also be realised with existing buildings. When considering new building projects and the embedding into the traffic concept, the communes need to be involved early into the planning process, because they have to create a possible reduction of parking spaces. As a result, financial resources for creating parking spaces can be saved and passed over to the tenants via special offer conditions. Another possible accompanying measure could be a stationbound bike rental system with e- bikes that is set up exclusively and only accessible for the residents of participating quarters. The rental bikes should be offered in enclosed and weather- resistant premises. Access and rent could organized via mobility card which can simultaneously function as tenant ticket as well. 5. Résumé and prospects The establishment of tenant ticket offers may result in a win- win- situation for all participants, but are currently little considered as possibility to connect housing and transport. The developed models for tenant tickets, voluntary tenant ticket, solidary tenant ticket and ticket sharing, consider different residential areas, number of tenants, stock or new building and further influencing factors that a tenant ticket can be establish in many residential areas. Table 1. Overview of the tenant tickets model
voluntary
solidary
sharing
functionality
minimum purchase of tickets and discount transfer to tenants
mixed calculation between frequent and spare users of public transport
sharing of a transferable season ticket by user group
ticket purchase
optional
obligatory
optional
discount related to season ticket price
low
high
medium to very high
target group
all tenants of the housing company
all tenants of the housing company or residential area
tenants of individual living quarters, community associations
implementation
stock and new building
new building only
stock and new building
further measures (sample)
station- bound carsharing with open access
station- bound carsharing with open access
neighbourhood- related carsharing
open Pedelec rental
neighbourhood- related carsharing
open Pedelec rental
open Pedelec rental
neighbourhood- related Pedelec rental
47
48
Carsten Sommer and Franz Lambrecht / Transportation Research Procedia 19 (2016) 40 – 48
The existing examples for tenant tickets and experiences from past initiatives shows the high potential and the positive effects for all actors. But there must be attend also requirements, approaches and surmount difficulties to reach a long term success. With a good and intensive cooperation between all actors are tenant tickets a particularly promising measure of the mobility management. References Bäumer, D. (2003). Mobilitätsservice für die VBW Bauen und Wohnen GmbH. In: U. Reutter & R. Penczek (ed.), Mieterticket & Co. – Erfolgsfaktoren siedlungsbezogener Mobilitätsdienstleistungen, 8–14. Dortmund: ILS –Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development. Bäumer, D. (2009). Preiswerte ÖPNV-Tickets für Mieter und Bewohner bestimmter Quartiere oder Wohnungsbestände. Retrieved from: http://addhome.eu/docs/ILS_ticket_for_tenants_guidelines_DE.pdf, 13.03.2015. Bäumer, D. et.al. (2009). Mobility meets housing. Retrieved from: http://addhome.eu/docs/ADDHOME_brochure_mobility_meets_housing_germany_final.pdf, 16.03.2015. Bäumer, D. & Köllinger, C. (2009). Einführung – Das Projekt Add-Home. In: ILS –Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development (ed.), Wohnstandortbezogenes Mobilitätsmanagement – Projektdokumentation des EU-Projektes Add Home, 2–3. Dortmund: author’s edition. Bäumer, D., Reutter, U. & Reudenbach, L. (2008). Mobilität trifft Wohnen – Eine aussichtsreiche Begegnung. Dortmund: ILS –Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development. Bäumer, D. & Stiewe , M. (2013). Klimaverträglich mobil in Zeichen des demografischen Wandels – wie wohnen Mobilität bestimmt. In: Proceedings REAL CORP 2013, 475 – 484. Rom Berliner Mieterverein (2005). Wohnumfeld und Autos. Retrieved from: http://www.berlinermieterverein.de/magazin/online/mm0305/030514.htm, 06.05.2015 BGB (2015). Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch. In: Federal Ministry of Justice and Consumer Protection (ed.). Berlin: author’s edition. Last amended: 20.11.2015 Dittrich-Wesbuer, A. & Reutter, U. (2003). Von der Idee zur Umsetzung – Erfolgsfaktoren siedlungsbezogener Mobilitätsdienstleistungen. In: U. Reutter & R. Penczek (ed.), Mieterticket & Co. – Erfolgsfaktoren siedlungsbezogener Mobilitätsdienstleistungen, 8–14. Dortmund: ILS – Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development. Gogol, A. (2007). Evaluation zielgruppenspezifischer Mobilitätsdienstleistungen von Wohnungsunternehmen. In: Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung und Bauwesen des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen (ed.)., Dortmund: author’s edition. Mobilität in Deutschland (MID) (2008). Database of MID 2008. www.mobilitaet-in-deutschland.de. moBiel GmbH & Bielefelder Gemeinnützige Wohnungsgesellschaft mbH (2015). Bitte einsteigen – das BGW-Mieterticket für Bus und Bahn. Retrieved from: http://www.bgw-bielefeld.de/mieten-wohnen/lexikon-mieten-wohnen/m/mieterticket-fuer-bus-und-bahn.html, 13.11.2015. Müller, G. (2003). Von der Reiseauskunft zum Mieterticket…Ideen und Anwendungsfelder des siedlungsbezogenen Mobilitätsmanagements. In: U. Reutter & R. Penczek (ed.), Mieterticket & Co. – Erfolgsfaktoren siedlungsbezogener Mobilitätsdienstleistungen, 23–30. Dortmund: ILS – Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development. VBW (2015). The tenant ticket of the VBW Bauen und Wohnen in Bochum. Retrieved from: http://www.vbw-bochum.de/service/rund-umswohnen, 13.11.2015. Verkehrsclub Österreich VCÖ – Mobilität mit Zukunft (2014). Wohnen bewegt Menschen. In: VCÖ-Magazin. – 6 (2014), 5, 1. Wien Zurlinden (2013). Der Sihlbogen in Zürich-Leimbach. Retrieved from: http://www.bgzurlinden.ch/projekte/fileadmin/user_upload/Sihlbogen/Medien/Zuerich2_14112013.pdf, 06.05.2015