BESTUFS Feedback on factors for success and failure with the Toulouse UDC - Gilbert TRAN THANH 28 september 2007
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
BESTUFS
Feedback on factors for success
and failure with the Toulouse UDC
Gilbert TRAN THANH
tran-thanh.gilbert@mairie-toulouse.fr
28 september 2007
Presented by Laetitia Dablanc, Inrests
Contents
I) Definition of the UDC project
II) Feedback on failure of the UDC in
Toulouse
A global approach
• Consultation between:
• The City of Toulouse
• Carriers’ organisations
• The Toulouse Chamber of Commerce and Industry
• Participation in programmes:
• CIVITAS (MOBILIS project)
• ADEME (pilot city for the NGV project)
The Toulouse UDC project
City Centre
UDC
Diagram 1: flow of goods without going through the UDC
City centre
CDU
Diagram 2: flow of goods going through the UDC
Flow of lorries entering Concentration
Flow of lorries outgoing
UDC round Rationalisation
Assistance to firms
MOBILIS:
subsidy of 140,000 euros (N.G.V. vehicles for an equipment and
handling platform and development of the information system)
City of Toulouse:
reserve for rental of 2,000m² of a platform (50 euros not incl. VAT
per m² / annum)
ADEME (Toulouse pilot city until end 2007):
1,500 euros per N.G.V. light utility vehicle,
30% excess cost for HGVs (i.e. about 7,500 euros).
Levers for action – Regulation encouraging UDC – Communication in favour of UDC
• Setting up a new regulation for deliveries
in the city
With the following constraints:
• Hours
• Length
• Zoning
Failure in consultation on an
environmental regulation
Levers for action – Regulation encouraging UDC – Communication in favour of UDC: • Charter for deliveries • Project for a badge for carriers and traders • Census of “clean” delivery firms
• Urban developments:
– Delivery Areas (DAs) (distribution, sizing and
ergonomics)
Retail traders Retail traders
served by served by
Indicators Retail trade
DA: radius of 25m DA: radus of 50m
N
Sectors Part Part Part
o
1 : la grave +
3.1 45.8 54.2
teinturiers
2 : taur + valade
14.8 25.8 48.0
+ st sernin
3 : wilson 34.8 31.2 57.2
4 : capitole 23.8 20.1 35.6
5 : les carmes 12.1 35.8 51.9
6 : ozenne 11.4 31.1 49.2
TOTAL 100.0 28.8 49.1• Urban developments: – CLS (Controlled Logistics Space)
Feedback • Structural factors • Organisational factors • Political factors
Feedback
• Structural factors
– Status of UDC
• Private management
• Consortium or neutral firm
• Start-up subsidy
– Operational investment constraints
– IT system interoperabilityFeedback
• Structural factors
– Status of UDC
– Operational investment constraints
• Location of platform (Fondeyre or Raynal)
• Cost of routing (structure of rounds)
• Piggybacking
• Type of vehicles (NGV or electric)
– IT system interoperabilityFeedback • Structural factors – Status of UDC – Operational investment constraints – IT system interoperability
Feedback • Organisational factors – Relating to carriers – Relating to traders
Feedback
• Organisational factors
– Relating to carriers
• Terminal delivery constraints
• Cost of break in load
• Located less than 15 km (10 miles) north of
Toulouse
• Use of vehicles weighing less than 3.5 tonnes
– Relating to tradersAxe Paris Toulouse Narbonne Paris Toulouse Muret axis Town limits Location of a carrier
Dépenses
Loyer de la plate-forme (1) 100 000
Loyer des bureaux (2) 6 000
Assurances des locaux et assurance
3 500
responsabilité civile (3)
Position/week (I) 3 380 Maintenance (local) 7 000
Mobilier 2 000
Number of vehicles and drivers II) 16 charges liées au bâtiment 118 500
Location de véhicules (4) 336 960
Dashboard (management Average weight per drop-off (III) 58 Carburant (Essence, electricité, gaz) (5) 40 361
Petite maintenance et assurances des
chart) for scenario 1 Total of loads (IV) 1 539 628 € véhicules (6)
28 000
Charge locative de matériels de
Average cost at position (V) 8,76 € manutention (7)
4 200
Charges liée aux véhicules et matériels de manutention 409 521
Equivalent vehicle cost (VI) 257,46 € Téléphone 7 000
Fournitures administratives 10 000
Fournitures non stockées (eau, électricité,
10 000
gaz)
Achat de palettes 3 000
Charges liées aux fournitures 30 000
Position/week (I) 1 900 Système informatique 12 000
8 000
Number of vehicles and drivers II) 9 EDI
Location GPS, appareil de suivi des colis
-
Tableau de bord Average weight per drop-off (III) 58 (8)
Charges liées à l'informatique 20 000
du scénario 2 Total of loads (IV) 1 062 778 € Litiges 10 000
Provision, créance clients irrécupérables (9) -
Average cost at position (V) 10,76 € 10 000
Honoraire, avocats, expert comptable
Equivalent vehicle cost (VI) 314,43 € Communication 7 500
Frais de déplacement 5 000
Charges liées à la communication et déplacement 32 500
Taxe foncière (10) 17 400
Taxe professionnelle (11) 50 677
Impôts et taxes 68 077
Charge de personnel (brut) par mois nombre
Chauffeurs (12) 1 800 16
Chef de quai 2 300 1
Manutentionnaires (13) 1 400 3
Commercial 1 800 0
Opératrices de saisi (14) 1 400 2
Administratifs 1 800 2
Chef d'exploitation 3 000 1
Directeur 3 500 1
Remplacement pour absentéisme et congés
(15) 59 400
Total charge personnel 637 800
Charge patronale 35%
Coût du personnel 861 030
Dotations aux amortissements et provisions (16) -
TOTAL des CHARGES 1 539 628 €Feedback
• Organisational factors
– Relating to carriers
– Relating to traders
• Does not intervene in choice of supply chain
• Advantages of related services
• Work to be done with suppliersFeedback
• Political factors
– Carriers,
• Constructive consultation
• Resistance from one organisation out of three
– Traders and local inhabitants,
– Institutional.Feedback
• Political factors
– Carriers,
– Traders and local inhabitants,
• Equivalent service at same price
• Image of innovation and responsibility
– Institutional.Retour d’expériences
• Political factors
– Carriers,
– Traders and local inhabitants,
– Institutional.
• Problem of competences
• Seeking a global consensus
• Forthcoming electionsSummary
• Favourable points • Negative points
• Private management • Proximity of platforms less
• Subsidy on start-up than 15 km from city centre
• One platform • Failure in environmental
• Supply to NGVs regulation
• Setting up an applicable • Minimum market not visible
reglulation enough
• Political weaknessEchec du CDU
Appel à candidature
Compte de résultat
Echec politique et
Echec dans la concertation
Projet de charte
de livraisons et
de macarons
Echec de la
réglementation
environnementale
Etudes
Mars mai Juillet janvier Juin Temps
2006 2006 2006 2007 2007BESTUFS
Feedback on factors for success
and failure with the Toulouse UDC
Gilbert TRAN THANH
tran-thanh.gilbert@mairie-toulouse.fr
September 2007You can also read
