‘Deteriorating’ Cambridgeshire guided busway may need to be ripped up

[yorksrob]

Exactly.

It's not a perfect solution - nothing ever is, there always have to be compromises in the real world.

In relation to the Cambridge area busway, the heavy rail option would almost certainly have been the worst one due to high operating costs in relation to service frequency and no ability to directly serve the central part of Cambridge. It would likely have required a complete rebuilding to modern standards of what was only ever a single-track branch line (and of which the extension earthworks to Huntingdon station from St.Ives had been partly obliterated - not least by the current A14 road).

In the current timetable, off-peak Mon-Sat there are 8 buses per hour between St.Ives and Cambridge city centre in each direction - and that is higher frequency than when it opened due to it's popularity (it carried 3.5 million passengers in the year up to August 2014). Once the 'Cambridge North' railway station opens (to which the busway will be extended) I'd expect those passenger numbers to increase noticeably because people will be able to go directly from (fast) bus from St.Ives etc. to train.

It seems to be mostly outsiders who criticise it - the locals just happily use it

But the question should be, what have you gained by destroying the railway option, that couldn't have been achieved by providing the necessary busways within the urban area of Cambridge (where most of the congestion is likely to occur) and making the necessary improvements to the existing road (presuming the road between the two wasn't one continual traffic jam). You could have had a less expensive, but fit for purpose bus network for local journeys and still maintained the option of a direct train service for longer distance by extending some London trains to St Ives.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is what I don't get. Why do we need to spend money on a special surface for buses? Why not just a dedicated tarmac road?

The reason for guideways is that you can fit them in a smaller space than a single carriageway road of the required width. This probably makes the Luton one a good idea (subject to a tramway probably being better, and a through train service to London better still). But the Cambridge one's alignment is mostly wide enough for it to have just been a bus-only road, had the cycle track not been built and cycles simply permitted on said road.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

the idea being that if it is a special surface then other traffic CAN'T use it... however on the Luton busway it's a regular occurance for cars to at least TRY.

Camera at one end, nice big fine if you do drive on it. Doesn't then overly matter if the odd car does so long as you catch them all. They'll soon stop when they get the bill, and if the odd one persists there's at least some free income for the Council. The car traps seem a silly idea as the car gets stuck and closes the busway - this causes far more disruption than the odd car driving down it and getting a fine.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

Go on then. Get your political party of choice to propose another round of Beeching cuts and see how far it gets them.

so by your reckoning high subsidy good... fully commercial bad... rail passengers of high enough class to be highly subsidised... bus services for the oiks...

why not throw the same amount of money at our bus services as that thrown at the railways? after all the MAJORITY of journeys by public transport are by bus... despite what you might think.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Camera at one end, nice big fine if you do drive on it. Doesn't then overly matter if the odd car does so long as you catch them all. They'll soon stop when they get the bill, and if the odd one persists there's at least some free income for the Council. The car traps seem a silly idea as the car gets stuck and closes the busway - this causes far more disruption than the odd car driving down it and getting a fine.

The problem with bus lanes is that they just don't work in general. In swansea they put nice big gates at each end of a dedicated bus only road... the gates take so long to open at each end that it negates all the timesavings of having the bus only road.

Motorists do not care about buses... lane discipline... box junctions...

and remember that if you start handing out fines willy nilly to enforce the rules you will be accused of a war against motorists.

in truth the problem with the car traps on the luton busway is that people have abdicated their common sense to gadgets... their satnav says turn here so they do... even though it is blatantly not a good idea... same reason why cars end up on rail lines and in canals.

Of course that's if the motorist is even bothering to look at the road ahead.. I drive for a living and regularly see cars hurtle past on the motorway at 70mph with the driver's nose buried in their phone (sometimes even using BOTH thumbs to send texts)

 

[yorksrob]

so by your reckoning high subsidy good... fully commercial bad... rail passengers of high enough class to be highly subsidised... bus services for the oiks...

why not throw the same amount of money at our bus services as that thrown at the railways? after all the MAJORITY of journeys by public transport are by bus... despite what you might think.

That's quite an ironic statement, considering I'm the one who's been arguing that a rail option should be made available to more people, whilst you've been suggesting they all get on the bus.

You should come and travel on some trains around here (in Yorkshire) and you will find that far from being "a rich man's toy" as suggested by Philip Hammond, a wide range of people use our trains, including families, young people, the elderly etc. The best bit is, in West Yorkshire at any rate, the subsidy helps to keep the price down and makes the railway even more accessible to those people whom you place in the "oik" category.

As for commercial verses subsidy, even for buses, I would agree that a greater degree of subsidy is probably necessary for them to be what people need. I certainly don't agree that private operators should be allowed to cream off the best routes and leave the Council with the expensive ones to subsidise. Council's should be able to specify services and develop cross-subsidies between profitable and non-profitable routes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The problem with bus lanes is that they just don't work in general.

Are you the mayor of Liverpool?

I personally think well-designed bus lanes (on the model you get in Europe) are very effective - such things as allowing right turns across lanes of traffic using traffic lights are an excellent example.

In swansea they put nice big gates at each end of a dedicated bus only road... the gates take so long to open at each end that it negates all the timesavings of having the bus only road.

The gates seem silly. Put a camera in, warn drivers about it, have an £80 fine for each time you drive down it, and ensure enforcement by said camera is 100%. If the odd car *still* drives down it, it won't be enough to slow the bus and they'll pay £80 into Council funds. Then stop worrying about it.

and remember that if you start handing out fines willy nilly to enforce the rules you will be accused of a war against motorists.

Seems to work in London.

 

[kylemore]

The concept is flawed - surely the prime quality of the bus is it's flexibility, it's ability to go anywhere - it's nothing to do with being anti-bus.

Making it into a pretendy train is just plain silly.

The proof that the concept is flawed is that despite decades of promotion of these schemes, full interurban guided busways are as rare as hen's teeth!

 

[MCR247]

I can see the point of a (non-guided) busway to bypass a congested stretch of road but a guided-busway where there isn't any particular width constraints seems silly to me

 

[Mojo]

When I used the busway it got stuck in a massive traffic jam as soon as it left the busway and took an absolute age to get from the end of the busway to the railway station. Looking at the timetable though it pretty much ran on-time so it's not as if it's a one-off.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

The gates seem silly. Put a camera in, warn drivers about it, have an £80 fine for each time you drive down it, and ensure enforcement by said camera is 100%. If the odd car *still* drives down it, it won't be enough to slow the bus and they'll pay £80 into Council funds. Then stop worrying about it.

Seems to work in London.

Yes but not elsewhere... Two examples in Bath and York recently which are more similar in size to Cambridge than London

https://www.nowbath.co.uk/news/call-for-scrapping-of-dorchester-street-bus-gate-56229/
http://www.yorkmix.com/news/opinion...-ban-is-a-cynical-move-that-will-damage-york/

 

[overthewater]

Don' forget Glasgow;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-29029946 £800'000 in two months.

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/28-of-appeals-over-bus-lane-fines-are-successful-186765n.25745882

https://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=14076

Mind you its been lifted due to the roadworks at the moment.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes but not elsewhere... Two examples in Bath and York recently which are more similar in size to Cambridge than London

https://www.nowbath.co.uk/news/call-for-scrapping-of-dorchester-street-bus-gate-56229/
http://www.yorkmix.com/news/opinion...-ban-is-a-cynical-move-that-will-damage-york/

The former case sounds like a confusing road layout that causes people to be led into the bus lane. I can certainly back up that the latter is highly confusing having driven there. But poorly-designed city centre road layouts are not relevant to a discussion of the Cambridge Busway, as I have also driven there and it is very obvious where you're not meant to go.

 

[ac6000cw]

But the question should be, what have you gained by destroying the railway option, that couldn't have been achieved by providing the necessary busways within the urban area of Cambridge (where most of the congestion is likely to occur) and making the necessary improvements to the existing road (presuming the road between the two wasn't one continual traffic jam). You could have had a less expensive, but fit for purpose bus network for local journeys and still maintained the option of a direct train service for longer distance by extending some London trains to St Ives.

The road between the two is part of the A14 - that section is one of the most congested trunk roads in the country, and has been desperately in need of widening for many years - it has not happened yet partly because it's going to be very expensive....The busway project (as a whole, since it involves bus services running beyond St.Ives on ordinary roads as far as Huntingdon (4 per hour) and Peterborough (1 ph)) was in part designed to try and alleviate congestion on the A14 from local traffic.

In general layout terms, Cambridge is a market town stuffed full of historic buildings in the centre, and with nowhere sensible (i.e. that people would even vaguely tolerate) to build a dedicated right-of-way to take buses through the city. Those considerations are partly what ruled out a modern tramway as well. It does have bus lanes on the main arterial roads where possible, and an extensive bus-based park-and-ride system with five large car parks on the periphery.

What is the point of having a railway service when you can have a system that can serve the local needs far better than a rebuilt rail line ever could, at far lower operating costs and with more flexibility ? These are express buses running at 56 mph on the busway, with air-con and Wi-Fi etc - it's quite a high quality service.

See http://www.thebusway.info/routes-and-times.aspx for more info, maps, timetables etc. (the guided busway part runs from 'St.Ives Park-and-Ride' to 'Science Park', and also from 'rail station' to 'Trumpington Park-and-Ride').

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The former case sounds like a confusing road layout that causes people to be led into the bus lane. I can certainly back up that the latter is highly confusing having driven there. But poorly-designed city centre road layouts are not relevant to a discussion of the Cambridge Busway, as I have also driven there and it is very obvious where you're not meant to go.

I agree - there have been some cases of drivers being stupid/very confused in Cambridge, but they get publicity out of all proportion to the actual problem *because* they are uncommon (just like rail accidents etc.).

 

[yorksrob]

What is the point of having a railway service when you can have a system that can serve the local needs far better than a rebuilt rail line ever could, at far lower operating costs and with more flexibility ? These are express buses running at 56 mph on the busway, with air-con and Wi-Fi etc - it's quite a high quality service.

If it then gets stuck in the traffic through Cambridge (which as you say, doesn't lend itself to road widening and remodeling schemes) and it takes longer to get to the station than the train would have, then your local transport benefits are achieved at the expense of a potential direct through train service to beyond Cambridge.

 

[edwin_m]

If it then gets stuck in the traffic through Cambridge (which as you say, doesn't lend itself to road widening and remodeling schemes) and it takes longer to get to the station than the train would have, then your local transport benefits are achieved at the expense of a potential direct through train service to beyond Cambridge.

I think interchange with the new station at the Science Park will help with that.

 

[yorksrob]

I think interchange with the new station at the Science Park will help with that.

Maybe so.

I don't think I'd give up my local train service, even if it enabled better and faster busses.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

If it then gets stuck in the traffic through Cambridge (which as you say, doesn't lend itself to road widening and remodeling schemes) and it takes longer to get to the station than the train would have, then your local transport benefits are achieved at the expense of a potential direct through train service to beyond Cambridge.

sorry but to be pedantic... but do the majority of people travelling into Cambridge want to go to the shops/ employment.... or the railway stn?

surely the criteria for journey time should be starting point to the city centre?

if you do it that way round then look at how long the train would take...

bus/car/ walk to stn... train journey... then walk or take bus/taxi through the congestion you claim that makes busway journeys to Cambridge so slow.

 

[yorksrob]

sorry but to be pedantic... but do the majority of people travelling into Cambridge want to go to the shops/ employment.... or the railway stn?

surely the criteria for journey time should be starting point to the city centre?

if you do it that way round then look at how long the train would take...

bus/car/ walk to stn... train journey... then walk or take bus/taxi through the congestion you claim that makes busway journeys to Cambridge so slow.

It depends what you want it for. Ultimately, the train tends to be more desireable for middle to longer distance journeys, so the railway would lend itself to people entering the National railway network. By extending existing services, you could potentially have through trains to London, Stanstead, Gatwick, the ECML at Stevenage, even the rest of East Anglia by extending the Bury St Edmunds service. Then, by making the necessary improvements to the A-roads and Cambridge centre (where viable) you could have an improved bus network for local journeys as well.

 

[Robertj21a]

If it then gets stuck in the traffic through Cambridge (which as you say, doesn't lend itself to road widening and remodeling schemes) and it takes longer to get to the station than the train would have, then your local transport benefits are achieved at the expense of a potential direct through train service to beyond Cambridge.

The main Busway route serves the centre of Cambridge, where most locals wish to go for their shopping etc. It does not serve the railway station and I can't see that many people in the area would want it to.

 

[ac6000cw]

If it then gets stuck in the traffic through Cambridge (which as you say, doesn't lend itself to road widening and remodeling schemes) and it takes longer to get to the station than the train would have, then your local transport benefits are achieved at the expense of a potential direct through train service to beyond Cambridge.

If you live in/near St.Ives and want to go towards London or Peterborough by train, you would tend to use Huntingdon railway station, not Cambridge - that's partly the reason why 2 per hour 'busway' buses serve it. As edwin_m said, that choice may change when 'Cambridge North' opens and provides other options.

 

[yorksrob]

The main Busway route serves the centre of Cambridge, where most locals wish to go for their shopping etc. It does not serve the railway station and I can't see that many people in the area would want it to.

Do people from St Ives not travel further afield than Cambridge ? I find it hard to believe that there isn't a latent demand for rail transport to the rest of the Country.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If you live in/near St.Ives and want to go towards London or Peterborough by train, you would tend to use Huntingdon railway station, not Cambridge - that's partly the reason why 2 per hour 'busway' buses serve it. As edwin_m said, that choice may change when 'Cambridge North' opens and provides other options.

That's fine, but it's still not a direct train from St Ives.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Do people from St Ives not travel further afield than Cambridge ? I find it hard to believe that there isn't a latent demand for rail transport to the rest of the Country.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


That's fine, but it's still not a direct train from St Ives.

Population of St Ives is 16.5k - not a huge market

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

That's fine, but it's still not a direct train from St Ives.

and what makes you think that if the Busway had been made a railway instead it would have been given a direct link to anywhere?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What line(s) used to run along it before it was turned into a guided busway

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

What line(s) used to run along it before it was turned into a guided busway

none whatsoever... it had been closed for years... probably since Beeching

 

[fgwrich]

none whatsoever... it had been closed for years... probably since Beeching

Incorrect. Passenger services were removed in the 1970s, But actually the line closed in the late 1990s after the cessation of the freight services with the track remaining until the mis-guided busway was unfortunately conceived...But don't let that get in the way of your Busway's are the future agenda!

What I actually thought should have happened to the line - Keeping it either as a Heavy Rail line and using either a shuttle service from Cambridge with a regular frequency with an extension of peaktime terminating services or a light rail system which has been proven to work well in plenty of other Cities - Yes it doesn't connect door to door with peoples houses to work, but neither do most tramway systems. But they would have been lighter and less damaging to the fenlands - unlike the dumping of these concrete sections on top, Yes it probably would have cost more than the original outline budget of the busway - but the council are paying badly for that now, and with a good connecting bus into a tramlink service would pretty much cover the door to door element quite well, or giving passengers or commuters a choice of Bus or Tram. No doubt quicker too than the not so faster than expected busway.

You might try to argue that busway's are the future, but I don't see it at all. Maybe in the right area or the right climate with the right mindset from the start, but not in this, or Luton, Or Edinburgh's case at all.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

What line(s) used to run along it before it was turned into a guided busway

In the late 1840's, the Cambridge and St Ives branch line was constructed by the Wisbech, St Ives and Cambridge Junction Railway.

 

[Robertj21a]

Do people from St Ives not travel further afield than Cambridge ? I find it hard to believe that there isn't a latent demand for rail transport to the rest of the Country.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



That's fine, but it's still not a direct train from St Ives.

1. No, not really. St Ives is small and Cambridge is their obvious destination. Many passengers will be car drivers fed up with the jams on the A14. Trains are a complete 'red herring'.

2. So ? - nor do many other small places.

 

[yorkie]

Yes but not elsewhere... Two examples in Bath and York recently which are more similar in size to Cambridge than London

https://www.nowbath.co.uk/news/call-for-scrapping-of-dorchester-street-bus-gate-56229/
http://www.yorkmix.com/news/opinion...-ban-is-a-cynical-move-that-will-damage-york/

That very out of date link is just a blog post by some some buffoon who is a member of the pro-car, anti-cycle, anti-bus pro-pollution brigade, which is best ignored. The bridge is back to being congested with cars.

 

[yorksrob]

1. No, not really. St Ives is small and Cambridge is their obvious destination. Many passengers will be car drivers fed up with the jams on the A14. Trains are a complete 'red herring'.

2. So ? - nor do many other small places.

Well, clearly trains manage not to be a red herring pretty much anywhere else that they run a suitable service, so you'll forgive me if I don't buy into the idea that St Ives, in contrast to pretty much everywhere else in the United Kingdom is so unique and other worldly, that it alone wouldn't have use for a connection to the rail network.

 

[edwin_m]

With the new interchange, the busway will give a rail connection at "Cambridge North" and also a direct link into the city centre. A rail alternative would mean commuters to central Cambridge would have to change to a bus at one or other of the stations, or walk for 20+ minutes.