Out curiosity how does section 106 work (never really looked into it) like do operators bid by saying to developers they will serve this place x amount a hour ect then developers pick and choose out the operators who are winning to provide and award and pay that operator or do they just approach operators and ask them to divert a route and pay up to them or something else
Depends on circumstances but essentially Section 106 is a planning condition - so the developer offers, or the planning authority requires, a certain amount of money to be spent on specified things to compensate or support the development going in. Sometimes it is funding a public transport link, sometimes ticketing but it, or a similar section rule, could include other features.
What generally happens is the developer would have involved a consultant early in the process who will approach local operators to give options and prices for how to serve the estate so by the time the planning permission is applied for they will normally have a decent idea that they can do what they say and often probably have an operator lined up to run the service when the building has reached the required stage. There isn't, I think, any actual requirement for operators to be consulted so it is possible for a developer to say they will divert a service without finding out whether the operator will do so in practice or what it will cost. Generally speaking, where a bus service is required, I think the base service level (frequency, day length & days of operation) will be specified in the Section 106 agreement that is attached to the planning permission but most developers these days will have checked and agreed with an operator before signing the planning permission
It used to be, and in some counties still is the case, that the local authority would take the section 106 money from the developer and tender the service themselves, which was often where the details between the original plan and practice would end up different (in detail but to the specified frequency etc) as no one had talked to the operators on the ground first about what they can/would do, but we are increasingly seeing direct relationships with the developer representatives which sees us involved much earlier in the process.
Now this will be an interesting answer. Does the section 106 money go direct or through a Council. How does the provider know that the level of service has been delivered (or multiple journeys missed, but with no penalty)?
As I said above, it varies from area to area and developer to developer how the funding is routed but more developers are managing it directly (or via their own appointed consultants). If the council is co-ordinating the developer relies on the council management and has little to do with it (beyond making sure the money is spent on the specified thing as if the council never gets round to doing it in the specified time the money returns to the developer and I have heard of that happening due to council ineptitude). Where there is a direct contract between developer and operator then they will often have procedures for reporting and monitoring this sort of thing just like any normal contract, though it is often less regular than the sort of monthly council reporting (my colleague has just done such a report for a Section 106 developer led contract covering the first 3 months of the service).
So what happens if the passenger usage isn't there, by the time the grant runs out?
As Travelmonkey said, if the funding runs out and the passenger numbers haven't become commercial the service probably ends though it may be that it the service level reduced to a viable level, merged into another service rather than being standalone or funding moves to coming from the general council funding pot if they feel a service is an ongoing need. This often happens with the smaller developments where the number of residents is never high enough to support the service alone or ones with a high proportion of more expensive homes where bus usage is always lower per-head. If the service is being provided by diverting a passing service there is more likelihood of the link surviving as the cost of serving the development is more hidden in the wider route costings so the loss of the developer funding may not tip it over to a loss making service (or the extra cost of serving it is marginal and removing would save little or nothing) whilst a dedicated service needs to stand on its own.
East Midlands parkway really does need a connecting bus. it's a white elephant for the airport. hopfully this and whatever happens to the ajacent defunct power plant means that the station is more than just a minor call with some local tangible benifits.
The problem, as I understand it, is the road layout and access time from the main road. Reportedly Trent did consider it for the Skylink Express when that was being planned but getting off the A453 to the station and back on added too much time to be attractive for the core through passengers. Just a quick run on Google Maps suggests 5/6-mins onto westbound journeys (there are 5 roundabouts to be navigated, most twice to get on/off) whilst eastbound is shorter it still looks like 4-mins extra or so.
