ECOMM 2010EuropeanConference on Mobility Management 5-7 May 2010Harnessing apartment search portals to mobility managementTomi Laine, Strafica Ltd.
Background • The choice of apartment’s location is the most remarkable decision in determining household’s transport needs, available transport modes, time used in daily trips and the caused emissions • 80 % of trips are based at home • Most people in city regions value good public transport connections and well accessible services • However, many people forget about these preferences and end up to a location, which makes their everyday life mal-functioning and car-dependent • By far, the struggles in guiding people from this point of view have been few
Aim of the project • The aim of the Finnish project is to bring mobility-related information to the consumers looking for new apartment and to help them to make “educated” choices • To reach the maximum number of consumers it is necessary to add mobility information to commercial apartment search portals • For example, in Finland 2 portals have over 400 000 users/week • The mobility management potential is huge, since by affecting the choice of location we get effect to all the trips generated by household • State of the project • Pre-study autumn 2009 • Specifications and organization model spring 2010
The importance of mobility service level in the choice of apartment • In the Helsinki Region, good transport connections are among the most important apartment choice criteria (Lankinen 2008) • In a study from Tampere (Yli-Pihlaja 2001), 83 % named good transport connections as important or very important criteria. • Short distance to services 74 % • well-functioning public transport 68 %. • Families with children value school, grocery store and parks within a walking distance from apartment (Kuluttajatutkimuskeskus 2008) • Over 90 % of the citizens in the biggest cities named public transport service level as an important criteria for apartment (internet-study N=2087) • 50 % named CO2-emissions as an important criteria • 8 people out of 12 estimated, that they would increase the use of sustainable travel modes if the project was accomplished (project workshop)
Classification of different features Transport and service information in apartment search portals A. Apartment-spesific features B. User-spesific features C. Mobility information as search criteria Location of services and bus stops on the map + walking distance in a table Forthcoming public transport projects (metro etc) on a map Prepared land-use changes on a map Public transport travel time to the centre or general service level Public transport travel time ”heat map” Travel times and distances with public transport and bicycle to own destinations + effects of travel (CO2 emissions, travel costs per year) Walking distance to school, groceries shop etc Public transport travel time to own destinations (or general public transport service level)
A model of user-spesific features • Household’s travel service level from this apartment is shown below • Household’s emissions and costs from this apartment with different modes are shown below
A Model of mobility information as a search criteria • Walking distance to selected services • Public transport and bicycle travel time to own destinations • (general public transport service level as alternative)
Needed development work • data sources (journey planners etc) and interfaces • mid-layer, which is needed to collect data from the sources and to calculate the needed figures. The mid-layer interface will be opened to all commercial actors. • integration work in each portal and the changes to user interfaces
Draft PPP-organization model • Cities are responsible for keeping the data sources up-to-date and to open the interfaces • Mid-layer development is shared with cities and national authorities • Commercial actors are responsible for their own integration work and user interface variation to the implementation • Commitment for 3-5 years?
Present state of the project (May 2010) • Specifications for the new features • co-operation with the commercial actors ensures, that the planned features are interesting also for them • Technical solutions, estimation of investment costs • Agreement of the organization model • Owner for the mid-layer • Responsibilities for upkeeping the data sources and developing the open interfaces • Share of the costs between communal and national authorities • Contracts autumn 2010 • Implementation, piloting, studies 2010-2011?
Partners • Financers • Ministry of the Transport and Communications • Ministry of the Environment • Finnish Transport Agency • Helsinki Region Transport • City of Helsinki, City of Tampere • Consultants • Tomi Laine, Heidi Saarinen, Juha Heltimo, Strafica Ltd • Johanna Taskinen, Motiva Ltd • Apartment Search portals • www.oikotie.fi • www.etuovi.com • www.mtv3.fi/jokakoti